* Use the presence of an argument type to check for associated values
hasOnlyCasesWithoutAssociatedValues returns true for any serialized
enum declaration whether or not it has cases. This never really came
up because it's mostly relevant to Sema's proto-deriving mechanism. Fix
this by using the presence of the case's argument type instead.
* Separate checks for presence of cases and enum simplicity
Necessary because the old behavior was an artifact of the
implementation.
Rather than true (an error occurred) or false (the constraint was
resolved), introduce ConstraintResult to better model what
happened. NFC for now, but the intent here is to report unresolved
constraints through this mechanism.
Like the previous commit, but with added trickiness because we also
serialize the form of the PatternBindingDecl a property came from.
Make getPattern handle a failure in the simple case that overrides
use, and pass that up to the PatternBindingDecl initialization. (This
can result in zero-element PatternBindingDecls, but that's fine.)
'getPattern' is also a change from 'maybeGetPattern', but every caller
knows how many patterns it expects, so accomodating the "maybe" case
is no longer important.
If the -enable-experimental-subclass-existentials staging flag
is on, resolveType() now allows protocol compositions to contain
class types. It also diagnoses if a composition has more than one
superclass requirement.
Also, change diagnostics that talked about 'protocol composition'
to 'protocol-constrained type'.
Since such types can now contain a superclass constraint, it's not
correct to call them protocol composition.
"Protocol-constrained type" isn't quite accurate either because
'Any' has no protocols, and 'AnyObject' will have no protocols but
a general class constraint; but those are edge cases which won't
come up in these diagnostics.
Whether a protocol composition requires a class is no longer
solely a property of what protocols it contains; now, a
protocol composition consisting of a non-class constrained
protocol and a superclass should return true from requiresClass().
This is done by looking at the ExistentialLayout, instead of
walking the members directly.
Don't assume all members are existential types; we could have
a class (or a class-constrained existential) also, and this
needs to be handled.
When building a canonical protocol composition, the subclass
requirement always comes first in the list of types. This is
an important invariant allowing ExistentialLayout to be
calculated quickly.
Also, calculate the recursive properties of the composition
type from the recursive properties of its members, since they're
no longer trivial if the composition contains a class member
with generic parameters.
This consolidates calculations which need to look at every
protocol in an existential type. Soon we will also have to
deal with superclass constrained existentials, so start
updating call sites that look at all protocols to use the
new ExistentialLayout and correctly handle a class constraint
as well.
Also, eventually I will kill off the AnyObject protocol and
model it as a protocol composition with no protocols or
superclass, but the requiresClass() flag set.
This is not quite modeled this way yet and AnyObject still
exists, but the new abstraction is a step in the right
direction.
That is, a Swift 3 target imported into a Swift 4 context or vice
versa. This requires serializing the compatibility mode explicitly,
instead of including it in the textual version string that's only
for debugging.
I reversed this loop's direction over the instruction list and forgot to change
the order of erasing an instruction with respect to advancing the iterator.
Thankfully ASAN is far smarter than I.
Converting between forward/reverse iterators makes the loop unreadable.
Add an iterator return value to BasicBlock::erase(SILInstruction*).
The dependent type that is the subject of a ProtocolRequirement
source is independently computable based on the root potential
archetype of the source and the potential archetype to which the
requirement applies, i.e., it's just the dependent member type that
gets from the former to the later. Compute this directly, rather than
relying on the passed-down dependent type.
This is possible now because we no longer capriciously rebase
requirements onto the representatives of equivalence classes, nor
destroy any other structural information in the formation of potential
archetypes.
Add a diagnostic pass that emits errors when a violation of the "Law of
Exclusivity" is detected at compile time. The Law of Exclusivity requires
that the access duration of any access to an address not overlap
with an access to the same address unless both accesses are reads.
This pass relies on 'begin_access' and 'end_access' SIL instruction
markers inserted by SILGen to determine when an access to an address begins and
ends. It models the in-progress accesses with a map from storage locations to
the counts of read and write-like accesses in progress for that location.
