If the placeholder is a typed one, parse its type string into a TypeRepr,
resolve it during typechecking and set it as the type for the associated EditorPlaceholderExpr.
Swift SVN r26215
The deallocating parameter convention is a new convention put on a
non-trivial parameter if the caller function guarantees to the callee
that the parameter has the deallocating bit set in its object header.
This means that retains and releases do not need to be emitted on these
parameters even though they are non-trivial. This helps to solve a bug
in +0 self and makes it trivial for the optimizer to perform
optimizations based on this property.
It is not emitted yet by SILGen and will only be put on the self
argument of Deallocator functions.
Swift SVN r26179
- Strength reduce isAtStartOfBindingName() to just check for
identifier or _ and inline into its two callers.
- Rename Token::isIdentifierOrNone to isIdentifierOrUnderscore.
- Teach InVarOrLetPattern about matching patterns, so that the
parser knows when it is parsing an expression as a matching
pattern but is not yet inside a let/var pattern.
- Use newfound knowledge of matching patterns to refine handling
of unexpected let/var when parsing an expression, but not in a
pattern context, slightly improving QoI in invalid cases.
Swift SVN r26172
This is still a subject of discussion on swift-dev, but it seems like clearly the right
way to go to me. If it turns out that this isn't a good direction, I'll revert this and
subsequent patches built on top of it.
Swift SVN r26168
This was because the ambiguity between c-style and foreach loops wasn't being
properly handled. Use the canParsePattern() logic to handle this in full
generality.
Since that logic was unused, dust it off and clean it up a bit. Similarly,
remove some old vestigates of default argument parsing in tuples and
old-syntax array handling.
Swift SVN r26164
duplicated by the InVarOrLetPattern state in the Parser object. Beef
InVarOrLetPattern up so that we can remove it.
NFC except that we now reject pointless let patterns in foreach loops,
similar to how we reject var patterns inside of let patterns.
Swift SVN r26163
This changes 'if let' conditions to take general refutable patterns, instead of
taking a irrefutable pattern and implicitly matching against an optional.
Where before you might have written:
if let x = foo() {
you now need to write:
if let x? = foo() {
The upshot of this is that you can write anything in an 'if let' that you can
write in a 'case let' in a switch statement, which is pretty general.
To aid with migration, this special cases certain really common patterns like
the above (and any other irrefutable cases, like "if let (a,b) = foo()", and
tells you where to insert the ?. It also special cases type annotations like
"if let x : AnyObject = " since they are no longer allowed.
For transitional purposes, I have intentionally downgraded the most common
diagnostic into a warning instead of an error. This means that you'll get:
t.swift:26:10: warning: condition requires a refutable pattern match; did you mean to match an optional?
if let a = f() {
^
?
I think this is important to stage in, because this is a pretty significant
source breaking change and not everyone internally may want to deal with it
at the same time. I filed 20166013 to remember to upgrade this to an error.
In addition to being a nice user feature, this is a nice cleanup of the guts
of the compiler, since it eliminates the "isConditional()" bit from
PatternBindingDecl, along with the special case logic in the compiler to handle
it (which variously added and removed Optional around these things).
Swift SVN r26150
conjunction with .fixItInsert(). As such, introduce a helper named
.fixItInsertAfter() that does what we all want. Adopt this in various
places around the compiler. NFC.
Swift SVN r26147
For now, we assume that 'while' after the braces starts
a do/while rather than being an independent statement.
We should disambiguate this, or better, remove do/while.
Tests later.
Swift SVN r26079
We parse 'try' as if it were a unary operator allowed on an
arbitrary element of an expr-sequence, but sequence-folding
constrains it to never appear on the RHS of most operators.
We do allow it on the RHS of an assignment or conditional
operator, but not if there's anything to the right which
was not parsed within the RHS.
We do this for assignments so that
var x = try whatever
and
x = try whatever
both work as you might expect.
We do this for conditionals because it feels natural to
allow 'try' in the center operand, and then disallowing it
in the right operand feels very strange.
In both case, this works largely because these operators are
assumed to be very low-precedence; there are no standard
operators which would parse outside the RHS. But if you
create one and use 'try' before it, we'll diagnose it.
Swift SVN r26052
a let/var pattern. Now any identifier in one of these is a variable binding,
not sometimes a value references (depending on contextual syntax).
This isn't expected to have a widespread effect on existing real world code:
- No impact on the stdlib.
- It does fix two validation crash tests, but possibly because the original issue is hidden by a different diagnostic path in the compiler.
- This needed two tests to be tweaked to undistribute "let".
On the positive side, this means that "case let x?:" now works properly, woo.
Swift SVN r26000
Make this diagnostic a little nicer in other ways, too:
- Highlight the whole attribute (including the at-sign).
- Don't hardcode the string "objc".
Swift SVN r25999
Corrected several places where compiler generated AST nodes were not properly
marked as implicit.
For interpolated strings also fixed string segment locations and made sure
the first and last segments are preserved in AST even if they are empty.
Swift SVN r25983
auto-completing @attributes. By delaying the handling of code completion token after the entire decl being parsed, we know
what are the targets of the attribute to finishe, thus, only suggesting those applicable attributes.
Swift SVN r25938
This introduces a new pattern, spelled "x?" which is sugar for
matching ".Some(x)". It also changes the parser slightly so that
_ (the discard expr) is parsed as a unary expr instead of as an
expr. This allows it to have postfix ? after it, which is important
in pattern contexts to support "case _?:".
Swift SVN r25907
For better consistency with other address-only instruction variants, and to open the door to new exciting existential representations (such as a refcounted boxed representation for ErrorType).
Swift SVN r25902
context-sensitive. The first step is to recommend parameter-applicable
attributes only when the code completion token is found inside a
param decl.
Swift SVN r25810
If '{' is encountered immediately after 'if', assume that the condition
is missing. Apply the same treatment to while, do-while, for-in, and
switch. This way we're not trying to re-parse, backtrack, repurpose
misparsed closure bodies, etc. in those cases. Users who want to write a
condition that starts with '{' can wrap it in parens.
Addressing feedback re <rdar://problem/18940198>.
Swift SVN r25747
step to achieve this goal, this change allows the first parameter of
@availability to be completed with either one of the following four
platforms: *, iOS, iOSApplicationExtension, and OSX.
rdar://19541135
Swift SVN r25703
Otherwise we'll get all the way to IRGen and then try to emit them. And try
to reference them in serialization.
rdar://problem/19935034
Swift SVN r25567
This doesn't allow 'continue' out of an if statement for the same reason we don't
allow it on switch: we'd prefer people to write loops more explicitly.
Swift SVN r25565
un-type-annotated AnyObject binding in "if let", and allows general
patterns in if-let.
This also reverts some unrelated QoI improvements that went in with those
patches, but I'll add those back next.
Swift SVN r25507
closure, reparse it as a brace statement instead of attempting to
repurpose the closure body. Suppress diagnostics from the initial
condition parse until we're committed to that parse.
<rdar://problem/18940198> Fuzzing Swift: performTypeChecking(...) crashes in ContextualizeClosures::walkToExprPre(...): Assertion failed: "Incorrect parent decl context for closure"
Swift SVN r25438
If multiple swift files are compiled together, then guessing as to the
file when we emit IR obviously doesn't work. Find the filename when we
generate a function's coverage map and propagate it through SIL.
Swift SVN r25436
