kind of pattern for let/else. While I haven't done extensive testing, I believe
that let/else is wired up and working now.
Please feel free to kick the tires on let/else and file radars if you run into problems.
The only piece that I know is missing is support for is/as patterns (which will fail on
an llvm_unreachable).
Swift SVN r27135
Place OpenExistentialExprs for references to lvalue subscripts or properties
(in protocol extensions) via existentials just outside of the member
or subscript reference, rather than far outside the expression. This
gives us a tighter bound on the open-existential expressions without
introducing the post-pass I was threatening.
OpenExistentialExprs just outside of lvalue member/subscript are
themselves lvalues. Resurrect John's OpenOpaqueExistentialComponent to
handle the opening of a (materialized) existential lvalues as an
lvalue path component. This has the nice effect of codifying the
formal access rules for opened existentials as well as handling inout
on opened existentials appropriately.
Big thanks to John for talking through the model with me and leaving
dead code around for me to use.
Swift SVN r27105
This isn't the right solution; we should be folding open-existentials
into the LValue machinery rather than subverting it. However, the test
cases are useful for we do get the right solution in place.
Swift SVN r27103
These aren't really orthogonal concerns--you'll never have a @thick @cc(objc_method), or an @objc_block @cc(witness_method)--and we have gross decision trees all over the codebase that try to hopscotch between the subset of combinations that make sense. Stop the madness by eliminating AbstractCC and folding its states into SILFunctionTypeRepresentation. This cleans up a ton of code across the compiler.
I couldn't quite eliminate AbstractCC's information from AST function types, since SIL type lowering transiently created AnyFunctionTypes with AbstractCCs set, even though these never occur at the source level. To accommodate type lowering, allow AnyFunctionType::ExtInfo to carry a SILFunctionTypeRepresentation, and arrange for the overlapping representations to share raw values.
In order to avoid disturbing test output, AST and SILFunctionTypes are still printed and parsed using the existing @thin/@thick/@objc_block and @cc() attributes, which is kind of gross, but lets me stage in the real source-breaking change separately.
Swift SVN r27095
register a DestroyLocalVariable cleanup: it will be a noop. Getting it out
of the apparently active set of cleanups allows us to avoid emitting empty
blocks in some cases.
Swift SVN r27049
The set of attributes that make sense at the AST level is increasingly divergent from those at the SIL level, so it doesn't really make sense for these to be the same. It'll also help prevent us from accidental unwanted propagation of attributes from the AST to SIL, which has caused bugs in the past. For staging purposes, start off with SILFunctionType's versions exactly the same as the FunctionType versions, which necessitates some ugly glue code but minimizes the potential disruption.
Swift SVN r27022
- Implement SILGen for conditional multi-pattern PBD's.
- Have the type checker check where clauses on PBDs.
- Change the AST to represent complex if/let PBD's with
composed PBDs instead of breaking them down. For example,
represent:
if let x? = foo(), y? = bar() where x == y {
as a single PBD in a StmtCondition instead of representing
it as three entries in the condition.
The later change is good for AST/source fidelity as well as providing
a cheap way to exercise all the logic I'm building.
Swift SVN r26959
This is necessary for correctly dealing with non-standard
ownership conventions in secondary positions, and it should
also help with non-injective type imports (like BOOL/_Bool).
But right now we aren't doing much with it.
Swift SVN r26954
When imploding a tuple element, not all of the active values may be used (because there
may be subsequent tuple elements), so remove a bogus assert. Fix tuple implosion to remove
the elements from the 'values' list of things in the rvalue because this may be in a nested
tuple context.
It turns out not to be related to the stuff I'm working on afterall, but good to fix.
Swift SVN r26909
Previously some parts of the compiler referred to them as "fields",
and most referred to them as "elements". Use the more generic 'elements'
nomenclature because that's what we refer to other things in the compiler
(e.g. the elements of a bracestmt).
At the same time, make the API better by providing "getElement" consistently
and using it, instead of getElements()[i].
NFC.
Swift SVN r26894
(containing just an uncond branch) when a shared block isn't actually shared.
This is a revised version of r26676 that makes sure to emit the cleanups for a
case pattern as soon as possible. Extending the lifetime of the case value
across the body of the switch caused extra copies of COW types.
Swift SVN r26685
This patch introduces a new kind of pattern for matching bool literals, i.e. true and false. Essentially, it is very similar to a pattern for matching enum elements, but simpler. Most of the code is just a boiler plate code copy/pasted from the code for enum element patterns. The only different thing is the emitBoolDispatch function, which emits a SIL code for matching bools.
With this patch, we don't get any false non-exhaustive switch diagnostics for switches on bools anymore. And we have a lot of radars complaining about it. For example rdar://16514545 and rdar://20130240.
Note, that this patch fixes the non-exhaustive switch diagnostics without changing the internal representation of bools. Implementing bool as an enum would have the same effect when it comes to these diagnostics and we would get this diagnostics fix for free, i.e. without any code committed here. But implementing bools-as-enums is an ongoing work and I'm investigating its performance implications. If we become confident that bool-as-enum does not have a negative impact on performance and decide to merge it, then we can revert this patch as it would not be necessary anymore. But if we decide to skip the enum-as-bool approach to its performance issues, then we would have at least fixed the false non-exhaustive diagnostics for bools by means of this patch.
Swift SVN r26650
Remove the semantic restrictions that prohibited extensions of
protocol types, and start making some systematic changes so that
protocol extensions start to make sense:
- Replace a lot of occurrences of isa<ProtocolDecl> and
dyn_cast<ProtocolDecl> on DeclContexts to use the new
DeclContext::isProtocolOrProtocolExtensionContext(), where we want
that behavior to apply equally to protocols and protocol extensions.
- Eliminate ProtocolDecl::getSelf() in favor of
DeclContext::getProtocolSelf(), which produces the appropriate
generic type parameter for the 'Self' of a protocol or protocol
extension. Update all of the callers of ProtocolDecl::getSelf()
appropriately.
- Update extension validation to appropriately form generic
parameter lists for protocol extensions.
- Methods in protocol extensions always use the witnesscc calling
convention.
At this point, we can type check and SILGen very basic definitions of
protocol extensions with methods that can call protocol requirements,
generic free functions, and other methods within the same protocol
extension.
Regresses four compiler crashers but improves three compiler
crashers... we'll call that "progress"; the four regressions all hit
the same assertion in the constraint system that will likely be
addressed as protocol extensions starts working.
Swift SVN r26579
We no longer need or use it since we can always refer to the same bit on
the applied function when deciding whether to inline during mandatory
inlining.
Resolves rdar://problem/19478366.
Swift SVN r26534
The string version of r26479. There's a lot of backstory and justification
there, so just read that commit message again. The one addition for String
is that global NSString constants are loaded as String as well, so that
also has to go through the bridging code even though there's no function
call involved.
Finishes rdar://problem/19734621.
Swift SVN r26510
...and similar for NSDictionary and NSSet.
For APIs that don't have a reason to distinguish "empty" and "absent" cases,
we encourage standardizing on "empty" and marking the result as non-optional
(or in Objective-C, __nonnull). However, there are system APIs whose
implementations currently do return nil rather than an empty collection
instance. In these cases, we recommend /changing/ the API to return the
appropriate "empty" value instead.
However, this can cause problems for backwards-deployment: while the API is
truly non-optional on system vN, a program may encounter a nil return value
if run on system vN-1. Objective-C can generally deal with this (especially
if the only thing you do is ask for the count or try to iterate over the
collection) but Swift can't. Therefore, we've decided to "play nice" and
accept nil return values for the collection types (NSArray, NSDictionary,
and NSSet) and implicitly treat them as "empty" values if they are the
result of an imported function or method.
Note that the current implementation has a hole regarding subscript getters,
since we still make an AST-level thunk for these in the Clang importer.
We can probably get rid of those these days, but I didn't want to touch
them at this point. It seems unlikely that there will be a subscript that
(a) is for a collection type, and (b) mistakenly returned nil in the past
rather than an empty collection.
There's another hole where an ObjC client calls one of these mistakenly-nil-
returning methods and then immediately hands the result off by calling a
Swift method. However, we have to draw the line somewhere.
(We're actually going to do this for strings as well; coming soon.)
rdar://problem/19734621
Swift SVN r26479
Currently a no-op, but effective access for entities within the current
module will soon need to take testability into account. This declaration:
internal func foo() {}
has a formal access of 'internal', but an effective access of 'public' if
we're in a testable mode.
Part of rdar://problem/17732115 (testability)
Swift SVN r26472
