[pull] swiftwasm-release/5.7 from release/5.7 #4581
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
![pull[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/12910?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
When two different serialization formats share a version number but are different enough, it can defeat the check to restrict loading swiftmodules built by the same compiler. Add a backup check in case the REVISION block is unseen, for swiftmodules only not swiftdoc or sourceinfo. rdar://93188070
…holders during ambiguity Since conjunction is not going to continue current solver path after discovering an ambiguity, let's just mark all of the unbound outer variables as placeholders to produce a complete solution. (cherry picked from commit 609b3e5)
If missing member is found in e.g. case statement or a pattern, let's attach diagnostic directly to it. (cherry picked from commit dfadee3)
While producing a combined solution, let's reflect the number of fixes and holes discovered in the conjunction, that way it would be possible to filter solutions and keep track of the fact that there were issues in the conjunction. (cherry picked from commit 4debf30)
This was an incorrect locator since constraints do belong to a sequence expression and not to a contextual pattern. (cherry picked from commit f210442)
If all solutions point to the same overload choice that needs re-labeling it's safe to diagnose it as if there was no ambiguity because the call site is static. (cherry picked from commit f3ff87b)
Calling `typeCheckDecl` on `VarDecl` is what triggers re-declaration checking and that was skipped by the solution application logic. (cherry picked from commit 854f64e)
…n statements Type finder is still allowed to walk into closures to find any referenced variables, but it should bring external result type into scope only if a particular `return` belongs to the same closure as the element. (cherry picked from commit ddd7e49)
…tag-check-5.7 [5.7][Serialization] Harden the compiler tag check on swiftmodules
…-improvements-5.7 [5.7][ConstraintSystem] A couple of improvements to multi-statement closure handling
The number of dependencies isn't super important for this test - it is just checking paths are correctly remapped. Remove the check for the number of dependencies.
…x-text [Test] Simplify index store test
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
See Commits and Changes for more details.
Created by
pull[bot]
Can you help keep this open source service alive? 💖 Please sponsor : )