New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Keep more ParenType parameter flags when canonicalizing function types #17369
Conversation
@swift-ci Please test |
@swift-ci Please test source compatibility |
The escaping-ness of a parameter doesn't seem like a very useful piece of data to have around anyways given that you can form function types in non-parameter position with the escaping bit set inside of them func church<A>(_ x : Int) -> (@escaping (A) -> A) -> (A) -> A { //... } |
I'll admit I don't exactly know what the end-game looks like here, and that my understanding is that this is mostly just a way to get from TupleTypeRepr to AnyFunctionType. For now, though, I just want something that'll fix the 4.2 issue. |
Build failed |
Yay for case sensitivity! My bad. |
This will also preserve @escaping and @autoclosure, which were previously dropped. This could lead to mismatches between expected and actual canonical types for serialization cross-references. https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-8045, likely others
@swift-ci Please test Linux |
@swift-ci Please smoke test macOS |
Build failed |
apple#17369) This will also preserve @escaping and @autoclosure, which were previously dropped. This could lead to mismatches between expected and actual canonical types for serialization cross-references. https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-8045, likely others (cherry picked from commit 8abaaea)
#17369) (#17380) This will also preserve @escaping and @autoclosure, which were previously dropped. This could lead to mismatches between expected and actual canonical types for serialization cross-references. https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-8045, likely others (cherry picked from commit 8abaaea)
This will also preserve
@escaping
and@autoclosure
, which were previously dropped. This could lead to mismatches between expected and actual canonical types for serialization cross-references.SR-8045 / rdar://40984769, likely others