ArraySlice indices now map directly onto the collection it is slicing
and maintains that mapping even after mutations.
Before:
var a = Array(0..<10)
var s = a[5..<10]
s.indices // 0..<5
s[0] = 111
s // [111, 6, 7, 8, 9]
s.removeFirst()
s.indices // 1..<5
After:
var a = Array(0..<10)
var s = a[5..<10]
s.indices // 5..<10
s[5] = 99
s // [99, 6, 7, 8, 9]
s.removeFirst()
s.indices // 6..<10
- Refactor some of the internals of the buffer types to make it easier
to read and understand.
- Add Array, ArraySlice, and ContiguousArray to the test suite at the
RangeReplaceable test entry points, subjecting them to the same tests
as all of our collections.
- Update existing test expectations for the indexing changes.
rdar://problem/21866825
Swift SVN r30840
Due to the fact that AnyClass is not Hashable, and that currently
NSKeyedArchiver/Unarchiver work with NSObject-derived, NSCoding
compliant classes, we are marking the decodeObjectOfClasses API refined
for Swift in our objc header and providing the desired overlay in our
overlay as shown below.
Arrays were also considered (for both API), but the underlying
implementation is entirely set-based, and using Arrays in Swift vs Sets
in objective C felt like too far a deviation.
Patch by Michael LeHew Jr.
Changes to the Dictionary test are caused by bumping the Fonudation API
epoch and taking in a fix in the types used in an NSDictionary
initializer.
rdar://21486551
Swift SVN r30297
Class representation
As Joe explained, when Swift passes a metatype like AnyClass for an type
defined in Objective-C, it will pass the Swift metadata pointer instead
of an id-compatible Class.
Swift SVN r30268
<rdar://problem/21384187> NSDictionary's convenience init(objects:
[AnyObject], forKeys keys: [AnyObject]) is unsound
This method is unsound / unsafe for Swift. There is not a way to
correctly express the alternating variadic type constant:
AnyObject, NSCopying,...
The overlay already defines a tuple based method that serves the same
role.
Patch by Michael J LeHew Jr.
Swift SVN r29497
This makes it clearer that expressions like "foo.myType.init()" are creating new objects, instead of invoking a weird-looking method. The last part of rdar://problem/21375845.
Swift SVN r29375
This came out of today's language review meeting.
The intent is to match #available with the attribute
that describes availability.
This is a divergence from Objective-C.
Swift SVN r28484
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
Use -[NSSet copyWithZone:] instead.
CFSetCreateCopy() is buggy in OSes that ship today: it copies the set
unconditionally, even if it is immutable, resulting in O(n) bridging.
Swift SVN r27733
Use -[NSDictionary copyWithZone:] instead.
CFDictionaryCreateCopy() is buggy in OSes that ship today: it copies the
dictionary unconditionally, even if it is immutable, resulting in O(n)
bridging.
Swift SVN r27732
The rule changes are as follows:
* All functions (introduced with the 'func' keyword) have argument
labels for arguments beyond the first, by default. Methods are no
longer special in this regard.
* The presence of a default argument no longer implies an argument
label.
The actual changes to the parser and printer are fairly simple; the
rest of the noise is updating the standard library, overlays, tests,
etc.
With the standard library, this change is intended to be API neutral:
I've added/removed #'s and _'s as appropriate to keep the user
interface the same. If we want to separately consider using argument
labels for more free functions now that the defaults in the language
have shifted, we can tackle that separately.
Fixes rdar://problem/17218256.
Swift SVN r27704
Provide an _ObjectiveCBridgeableErrorType protocol, which requires a failable initializer that attempts to map an NSError to a value of the error type. To start things off, gyb up an _NSCocoaError enum (underscored because we need to bikeshed a naming scheme) that corresponds to the standard NSCocoaErrorDomain codes.
Swift SVN r26820
The string version of r26479. There's a lot of backstory and justification
there, so just read that commit message again. The one addition for String
is that global NSString constants are loaded as String as well, so that
also has to go through the bridging code even though there's no function
call involved.
Finishes rdar://problem/19734621.
Swift SVN r26510
...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
We have an SPI between the Swift compiler and Foundation based on the
SWIFT_SDK_OVERLAY_FOUNDATION_EPOCH preprocessor macro that allows us to
request the new API. rdar://20270080 tracks removing it.
Swift SVN r26475
