This makes diagnostics more verbose and accurate, because
it's possible to distinguish how many parameters there are
based on the message itself.
Also there are multiple diagnostic messages in a format of
`<descriptive-kind> <decl-name> ...` that get printed as
e.g. `subscript 'subscript'` if empty labels are omitted.
If generic parameter associated with missing conformance comes
from different context diagnose the problem as "referencing" a
specific declaration from affected type.
Instead of simply pointing out which type had conformance failures,
let's use affected declaration instead, which makes diagnostics much
richer e.g.
```
'List<[S], S.Id>' requires that 'S.Id' conform to 'Hashable'
```
versus
```
initializer 'init(_🆔)' requires that 'E' conform to 'Hashable' [with 'E' = 'S.Id']
```
Since latter message uses information about declaration, it can also
point to it in the source. That makes is much easier to understand when
problem is related to overloaded (function) declarations.
If fixes are allowed let solver record missing protocol conformance
requirements and assume that `conformsTo` constraint is successfully
solved, this helps to diagnose such errors without involving
heavy-weight expression based diagnostics.
Resolves: rdar://problem/40537858
Number of defaults is a fallback condition if there are no other
differences, but pontential bindings which are literal should always
be ranked lower than anything else because there is a higher chance
that such bindings are wrong because their full set might not have
been resolved yet.
Resolves: rdar://problem/39616039
Attempt to use potential bindings inferred for related types variables
discoverable through 'subtype' constraints, this helps to build a
more precise bindings domain for each type variable.
Resolves: rdar://problem/38159133
This is useful for explicit casts and type expressions, where
type loc and expression types might be different, and allows
constraint solver to avoid setting opened types to expressions
which resolves multiple crashes.
Instead of binding collection types directly let's try to
bind using temporary type variables substituted for element
types, that's going to ensure that subtype relationship is
always preserved.
Resolves: rdar://problem/35541153
Presence of some constraints (Subtype at least) requires a certain
contextual ranking of the type variables associated with them when
it comes to picking bindings, otherwise it might lead to no or
invalid solutions, because only a set of the bindings for the best
type variable is attempted.
Resolves: rdar://problem/22898292
Presence of some constraints (Subtype at least) requires a certain
contextual ranking of the type variables associated with them when
it comes to picking bindings, otherwise it might lead to no or
invalid solutions, because only a set of the bindings for the best
type variable is attempted.
Resolves: rdar://problem/22898292
`LinkedExprAnalyzer` is not always precise in collecting types of expressions,
so let's not try to impose anything upon linked operator expressions, which are
"mergable", except actually merging argument/result types together to help
constraint solver.
Resolves: rdar://problem/27700622
Currently `visitAssignExpr` always attempts to use type
derived from destination as a contextual type for assignment
source type-checking, which doesn't always lead to better
results.
Resolves: SR-5081
Fixes a problem related to presence of InOutType in function parameters
which diagnostics related to generic parameter requirements didn't handle
correctly, and improves diagnostics for unsatisfied generic requirements
in operator applications, which we didn't attempt to diagnose at all.
Resolves: rdar://problem/33477726
When a type variable binds to an (unresolved) dependent member type,
it prevents us from inferring the type variable and adds no useful
information to the system. Refuse to bind type variables to dependent
member types.
Fixes rdar://problem/32697033.
Teach preCheckExpression() about UnresolvedSpecializeExpr
where the base is a TypeExpr.
This allows us to type check expressions like
'[Outer<T>.Inner<U>]()' by folding them down to a TypeExpr
with an array type.
It's undesirable to have generic type which contains type variables
as contextual conversion type while diagnosing sub-expressions, it's
going to result in attempt to convert generic arguments to unresolved
type which produces worse diagnostics than no contextual type at all.
Resolves: SR-3525.
Once we've bound a type variable, we find those inactive constraints
that mention the type variable and make them active, so they'll be
simplified again. However, we weren't finding *all* constraints that
could be affected---in particular, we weren't searching everything
related to the type variables in the equivalence class, which meant
that some constraints would not get visited... and we would to
type-check simply because we didn't look at a constraint again when we
should have.
Fixes rdar://problem/29633747.
When trying to diagnose ambigiuty with constraint system check if any of the
unresolved type variables are related to generic parameters, and if so
try to diagnose a problem based on the number of constraints associated with
each of the unresolved generic parameters.
Number of constraints related to a particular generic parameter
is significant indicator of the problem, because if there are
no constraints associated with it, that means it can't ever be resolved,
such helps to diagnose situations like: struct S<A, B> { init(_ a: A) {}}
because type B would have no constraints associated with it.
When performing the occurs check, look for the *representative* of the
type variable we're about to bind, rather than the type variable
itself. Fixes rdar://problem/26845038, SR-1512, SR-1902, SR2635,
SR-2852, and SR-2766.
