Repository navigation
[SR-6419] NotificationCenter.addObserver of SCLF with trailing closure syntax cannot be used on Swift 4.0.2 #3786
Description
| Previous ID | SR-6419 |
| Radar | None |
| Original Reporter | @ikesyo |
| Type | Bug |
| Status | Resolved |
| Resolution | Done |
Additional Detail from JIRA
| Votes | 0 |
| Component/s | Foundation |
| Labels | Bug |
| Assignee | @ikesyo |
| Priority | Medium |
md5: 1cb775e2d2830c261d8a0e8e57a0fbcd
Issue Description:
In Swift 4.0.2 NotificationCenter.addObserver(forName:object:queue:usingBlock🙂 is renamed to addObserver(forName:object:queue:using🙂 and the old API is kept as an obsoleted API. The obsoleted symbol makes it ambiguous to use the API with trailing closure syntax:
self.token = self.notificationCenter.addObserver(forName: nil, object: nil, queue: nil) { [weak self] n in
// linux-swift gets confused by .append(n)
self?.observedNotifications.append(n)
}This is found at Quick/Nimble#481
/home/travis/build/lvsti/MockSix/.build/checkouts/Nimble.git--3756397004363768916/Sources/Nimble/Matchers/PostNotification.swift:18:27: error: ambiguous use of 'addObserver'
self.token = self.notificationCenter.addObserver(forName: nil, object: nil, queue: nil) { [weak self] n in
^
Foundation.NotificationCenter:9:15: note: found this candidate
open func addObserver(forName name: Foundation.NSNotification.Name?, object obj: Any?, queue: Foundation.OperationQueue?, usingBlock block: @escaping (Foundation.Notification) -> Swift.Void) -> NSObjectProtocol
^
Foundation.NotificationCenter:10:15: note: found this candidate
open func addObserver(forName name: Foundation.NSNotification.Name?, object obj: Any?, queue: Foundation.OperationQueue?, using block: @escaping (Foundation.Notification) -> Swift.Void) -> NSObjectProtocol
^Usually we don't keep old (pre-renamed) symbols (e.g. #1315 so the obsoleted API should be removed to make it unambiguous.
Activity
belkadan commentedon Nov 17, 2017
@phausler There was a dup of this for macOS, right?
ikesyo commentedon Nov 23, 2017
@available(*, obsoleted: 4.0)is not appropriate and@available(swift, obsoleted: 4.0)should be used instead.ikesyo commentedon Nov 23, 2017
I was requested to use
@available(*, unavailable)instead of@available(swift, obsoleted: 4.0).ikesyo commentedon Nov 23, 2017
So the actual issue here is
@available(*, obsoleted: 4.0)means iOS 4.0, macOS 4.0, tvOS 4.0, watchOS 4.0 and does not mean Swift 4.0.belkadan commentedon Nov 27, 2017
That's hilarious. We should definitely be rejecting that!
alblue commentedon Nov 28, 2017
This has been merged into the master branch, which should be part of the 4.1 release.