Commit Graph

4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Doug Gregor
9271a24a92 Introduce a protocol conformance registry for nominal types.
(Note that this registry isn't fully enabled yet; it's built so that
we can test it, but has not yet taken over the primary task of
managing conformances from the existing system).

The conformance registry tracks all of the protocols to which a
particular nominal type conforms, including those for which
conformance was explicitly specified, implied by other explicit
conformances, inherited from a superclass, or synthesized by the
implementation.

The conformance registry is a lazily-built data structure designed for
multi-file support (which has been a problematic area for protocol
conformances). It allows one to query for the conformances of a type
to a particular protocol, enumerate all protocols to which a type
conforms, and enumerate all of the conformances that are associated
with a particular declaration context (important to eliminate
duplicated witness tables).

The conformance registry diagnoses conflicts and ambiguities among
different conformances of the same type to the same protocol. There
are three common cases where we'll see a diagnostic:

1) Redundant explicit conformance of a type to a protocol:

    protocol P { }
    struct X : P {  }
    extension X : P { } // error: redundant explicit conformance

2) Explicit conformance to a protocol that collides with an inherited
  conformance:

    protocol P { }
    class Super : P { }
    class Sub : Super, P { } // error: redundant explicit conformance

3) Ambiguous placement of an implied conformance:

    protocol P1 { }
    protocol P2 : P1 { }
    protocol P3 : P1 { }

    struct Y { }
    extension Y : P2 { }
    extension Y : P3 { } // error: ambiguous implied conformance to 'P1'

  This happens when two different explicit conformances (here, P2 and
  P3) placed on different declarations (e.g., two extensions, or the
  original definition and other extension) both imply the same
  conformance (P1), and neither of the explicit conformances imply
  each other. We require the user to explicitly specify the ambiguous
  conformance to break the ambiguity and associate the witness table
  with a specific context.

Swift SVN r26067
2015-03-12 21:11:23 +00:00
Jordan Rose
0a9d60485f Don't look into a type context to resolve types in the inheritance clause.
Instead, just check the generic parameters, then do a lookup as usual in the
enclosing context.

Fixes crash suite #58 and quite a few others (~200). This looks way more
impressive than it is; in most of these test cases it's the exact same
pattern causing the crash, and that pattern was just the last outstanding
crash trigger in a sea of garbage. (The few deleted tests were identical
to #58.)

Swift SVN r24748
2015-01-27 02:45:29 +00:00
Dmitri Hrybenko
3b04d1b013 tests: reorganize tests so that they actually use the target platform
Most tests were using %swift or similar substitutions, which did not
include the target triple and SDK.  The driver was defaulting to the
host OS.  Thus, we could not run the tests when the standard library was
not built for OS X.

Swift SVN r24504
2015-01-19 06:52:49 +00:00
Doug Gregor
81a5a41944 Move test for inheritance.
Swift SVN r6726
2013-07-29 23:50:18 +00:00