- If a parameter type is a sugared function type, mark the type
as non-escaping by default. Previously, we were only doing this
if the parameter type was written as a function type, with no
additional sugar.
This means in the following cases, the function parameter type
is now non-escaping:
func foo(f: ((Int) -> Void))
typealias Fn = (Int) -> Void
func foo(f: Fn)
- Also, allow @escaping to be used in the above cases:
func foo(f: @escaping ((Int) -> Void))
typealias Fn = (Int) -> Void
func foo(f: @escaping Fn)
- Diagnose usages of @escaping in inappropriate locations, instead
of just ignoring them.
It is unfortunate that sometimes we end up desugaring the typealias,
but currently there are other cases where this occurs too, such as
qualified lookpu of protocol typealiases with a concrete base
type, and generic type aliases. A more general representation for
sugared types (such as an AttributedType sugared type) would allow
us to solve this in a more satisfactory manner in the future.
However at the very least this patch factors out the common code
paths and adds comments, so it shouldn't be too bad going forward.
Note that this is a source-breaking change, both because @escaping
might need to be added to parameters with a sugared function type,
and @escaping might be removed if it appears somewhere where we
do not mark function types as non-escaping by default.
Implements part of SE-0110. Single argument in closures will not be accepted if
there exists explicit type with a number of arguments that's not 1.
```swift
let f: (Int, Int) -> Void = { x in } // this is now an error
```
Note there's a second part of SE-0110 which could be considered additive,
which says one must add an extra pair of parens to specify a single arugment
type that is a tuple:
```swift
let g ((Int, Int)) -> Void = { y in } // y should have type (Int, Int)
```
This patch does not implement that part.
Commit 93dfc166 "More reliably avoid running duplicate tests"
accidentally disabled too many tests. If one test file was testing
multiple collections, only the first one was tested, the rest were
skipped as duplicate tests.
Adds an explicit @escaping throughout the standard library, validation
test suite, and tests. This will be necessary as soon as noescape is
the default for closure parameters.
As of now:
* old APIs are just marked as `deprecated` not `unavaiable`. To make it
easier to co-operate with other toolchain repos.
* Value variant of API is implemented as public @private
`_ofInstance(_:)`.
Update for SE-0107: UnsafeRawPointer
This adds a "mutating" initialize to UnsafePointer to make
Immutable -> Mutable conversions explicit.
These are quick fixes to stdlib, overlays, and test cases that are necessary
in order to remove arbitrary UnsafePointer conversions.
Many cases can be expressed better up by reworking the surrounding
code, but we first need a working starting point.
* Migrate from `UnsafePointer<Void>` to `UnsafeRawPointer`.
As proposed in SE-0107: UnsafeRawPointer.
`void*` imports as `UnsafeMutableRawPointer`.
`const void*` imports as `UnsafeRawPointer`.
Occurrences of `UnsafePointer<Void>` are replaced with UnsafeRawPointer.
* Migrate overlays from UnsafePointer<Void> to UnsafeRawPointer.
This requires explicit memory binding in several places,
particularly in NSData and CoreAudio.
* Fix a bunch of test cases for Void->Raw migration.
* qsort takes IUO values
* Bridge `Unsafe[Mutable]RawPointer as `void [const] *`.
* Parse #dsohandle as UnsafeMutableRawPointer
* Update a bunch of test cases for Void->Raw migration.
* Trivial fix for the SceneKit test case.
* Add an UnsafeRawPointer self initializer.
This is unfortunately necessary for assignment between types imported from C.
* Tiny simplification of the initializer.
What I've implemented here deviates from the current proposal text
in the following ways:
- I had to introduce a FunctionArrowPrecedence to capture the parsing
of -> in expression contexts.
- I found it convenient to continue to model the assignment property
explicitly.
- The comparison and casting operators have historically been
non-associative; I have chosen to preserve that, since I don't
think this proposal intended to change it.
- This uses the precedence group names and higherThan/lowerThan
as agreed in discussion.
