[Diagnostics] Fixits for extra arguments in nullary call #16652
Conversation
| @@ -1666,7 +1666,7 @@ do { | |||
| f(a: logNoOptional() as ((()) -> Void)) // expected-error {{cannot convert value of type '(()) -> Void' to expected argument type '(() -> Void)?'}} | |||
|
|
|||
| func g() {} | |||
| g(()) // expected-error {{argument passed to call that takes no arguments}} | |||
| g(()) // expected-error {{argument passed to call that takes no arguments}} {{5-7=}} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Over here, the error is raised and the test passes.
| @@ -95,6 +95,16 @@ func parenPatternInArg((a): Int) -> Int { // expected-error {{expected parameter | |||
| } | |||
| parenPatternInArg(0) // expected-error {{argument passed to call that takes no arguments}} | |||
|
|
|||
| func nullaryFunctionFixit() {} | |||
| nullaryFunctionFixit(()) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here, however, the same error has to be raised, but it doesn't happen. When I run the compiler, it does raise an error. When I run the test, it passes without expecting any error.
| @@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ let _: (Int) -> (Int, Color) = { ($0, .Unknown("")) } // expected-error {{missin | |||
| let _: Color = .Unknown("") // expected-error {{missing argument label 'description:' in call}} {{25-25=description: }} | |||
| let _: Color = .Unknown // expected-error {{member 'Unknown' expects argument of type '(description: String)'}} | |||
| let _: Color = .Unknown(42) // expected-error {{missing argument label 'description:' in call}} | |||
| let _ : Color = .rainbow(42) // expected-error {{argument passed to call that takes no arguments}} | |||
| let _ : Color = .rainbow(42) // expected-error {{argument passed to call that takes no arguments}} {{26-28=}} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry, but IMO, we should not remove users code like this. This might be just a mistype of function name.
Removing () is implemented in #9583 because of migration need and it probably reflects users intent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason why this logic is here and why some tests fail and some don't is because type-checker has different logic when it comes to parens in the arguments positions based on the compiler version e.g. test/Constraints/tuple_arguments.swift specifies 5 and test/decl/func/functions.swift defaults to 3 i believe. We are currently trying to come up with a better representation for the arguments/parameters in function types, before that lands I'm not sure it's worth making any changes to this.
|
Thanks for the explanation, I had a second thought about that but wasn't sure. I am glad we no longer support the |
https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-7624
@xedin
PR aside, there is something very strange going on in the tests here. Please look into the review.
The issue is probably somehow related to #14477