* [Type System] Handle raw pointer conversion.
As proposed in SE-0107: UnsafeRawPointer.
https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0107-unsaferawpointer.md#implicit-argument-conversion
UnsafeMutablePointer<T> -> UnsafeMutableRawPointer
UnsafeMutablePointer<T> -> UnsafeRawPointer
UnsafePointer<T> -> UnsafeRawPointer
UnsafeMutableRawPointer -> UnsafeRawPointer
inout:
&anyVar -> UnsafeMutableRawPointer
&anyVar -> UnsafeRawPointer
array -> UnsafeRawPointer
string -> UnsafeRawPointer
varArray -> UnsafeMutableRawPointer
* Rename expectEqual(_, _, sameValue:) to expectEqualTest to workaround a type system bug.
<rdar://26058520> Generic type constraints incorrectly applied to functions with the same name
This is exposed by additions to the type system for UnsafeRawPointer.
Warning: unit tests fail very confusingly without this fix.
We were using a precondition which crashes the program when invalid input is
provided. We want to provide a way to gracefully check and handle invalid input
or shutdown the program if necessary.
SR-1930
- Remove free Swift functions for advance and distance and replace
them with protocol extension methods:
- advancedBy(n)
- advancedBy(n, limit:)
- distanceTo(end)
- Modernize the Index tests
- Use StdlibUnittest
- Test for custom implementation dispatch
Perf impact: No significant changes reported in the
Swift Performance Measurement Tool.
rdar://problem/22085119
Swift SVN r30958
The way we pass and compose source locations, messages, etc. needs to be
brought under control before too many more tests get written. This is
the first step.
Swift SVN r29928
includes a number of QoI things to help people write the correct code. I will commit
the testcase for it as the next patch.
The bulk of this patch is moving the stdlib, testsuite and validation testsuite to
the new syntax. I moved a few uses of "as" patterns back to as? expressions in the
stdlib as well.
Swift SVN r27959
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
...into the validation suite. This is the wrong solution but at least
the bots will continue to run all the tests and we won't regress.
Swift SVN r24934
