We know the number of the entries. Allocate the storage in ASTContext
directly, then initialize it transforming the bridged values.
Add ASTContext::AllocateTransform() helper function.
This allows building sourcekitd and swift-refactor with `SWIFT_BUILD_SWIFT_SYNTAX=NO`. In these builds, the `relatedidents` and `find-syntactic-rename-ranges` requests will always return an error.
The implementation is not 100% perfect but I don’t think it’s worth putting too much effort into it passing more information down in the parser if 'repeat' and 'each' are valid if we are going to remove the current parser anyway.
rdar://95725895
Follow-up to https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/70148
Just like with arrays it's advantageous to favor dictionary
literals over disjunctions to bind the elements together and
enable inference across elements and, as a consequence,
type pruning.
Resolves: rdar://119040159
I left them as friends since that was in the original code. There isn't a reason
to do this and break the encapsulation of Partition. I just added reasonable
helpers that give PartitionOpEvaluator all of the functionality it needs.
This is a simple work around to avoid importing virtual functions when symbolic
imports are turned on. Test cases that were failing before this WA are in
test/Interop/Cxx/symbolic-imports.
Thanks to Alex Lorenz for providing this WA to me (@hyp).
During the review of SE-0413, typed throws, the notion of a `do throws`
syntax for `do..catch` blocks came up. Implement that syntax and
semantics, as a way to explicitly specify the type of error that is
thrown from the `do` body in `do..catch` statement.
Previously I avoided doing this since the only problem would be that in a case
where we had two transfer instructions that were in an if-else block, we would
just emit an error for one:
```swift
if boolValue {
transfer(x)
} else {
transfer(x) // Only emit error for this transfer!
}
useValue(x)
```
Now that we are tracking at the transfer point if any element in the transfer
was captured in a closure, this becomes an actual semantic issue since if we
track the transfer instruction that isn't reachable from the closure capture, we
will not become more pessimistic:
```swift
if boolValue {
closure = { useInOut(&x) }
transfer(x)
} else {
transfer(x)
}
// Since we grab from the else block, sendableField is allowed to be accessed
// since we do not track that x was captured by reference in a closure.
x.sendableField
useValue(x)
```
To be truly safe, we need to emit both errors.
rdar://119048779
This allows one to place types like PointerIntPair and value types that wrap a
pointer into the pointer set.
I am making this change before I use this data structure in TransferNonSendable
and using ARC to validate that I haven't broken anything.
If the var is captured in a closure before it is transferred, it is not safe to
access the Sendable field since we may race on accessing the field with an
assignment to the field in another concurrency domain.
rdar://115124361
To verify if a function may read from an indirect argument, don't use AliasAnalysis.
Instead use the CalleeCache to get the list of callees of an apply instruction.
Then use a simple call-back into the swift Function to check if a callee has any relevant memory effect set.
This avoids a dependency from SIL to the Optimizer.
It fixes a linker error when building some unit tests in debug.
If array literal type is not delayed and doesn't have any type variables
associated with it, let's prefer it over a disjunction to facilitate
type propagation through its `Element` type to element expressions.
Resolves: rdar://118993030
