This previously blew up if the Objective-C client passed NULL for the
error parameter, but started working after the pointer nullability
change. Why? John had /already written and committed/ code to handle
NULL assuming pointer nullability was explicit, and that code was
/correct as is/.
...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
Fixes rdar://problem/19924834, which exposes a case where delayed protocols cause an imported enum's Equatabe protocol conformance to get instantiated too late, if the enum is imported by one file that doesn't use the Equatable conformance, and a subsequent file in the same invocation then uses the conformance. Jordan notes that delaying these conformances is no longer desirable, now that we dynamically detect conformances.
Swift SVN r25741
...and then honor them.
While here, make -l a little more flexible (see interpret_with_options test).
rdar://problem/17830826, which unblocks the LLDB feature for the same.
Swift SVN r24033
We were missing -_tryRetain, -_isDeallocating, -allowsWeakReference and -retainWeakReference implementations on SwiftObject, so forming an ObjC weak reference to a pure Swift object always failed and produced a nil reference. Fixes rdar://problem/18637774.
This can be reapplied now that we properly call objc_destructInstance on deallocation.
Swift SVN r23070
We were missing -_tryRetain, -_isDeallocating, -allowsWeakReference and -retainWeakReference implementations on SwiftObject, so forming an ObjC weak reference to a pure Swift object always failed and produced a nil reference. Fixes rdar://problem/18637774.
Swift SVN r22710
