[5.7][TypeChecker] Rework type-checking of for-in statements
#59261
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
|
@swift-ci please test |
hborla
approved these changes
Jun 3, 2022
|
@swift-ci please test |
Change the way how `for-in` statements are type-checked, where a lot of information has to be recorded in a statement in order for SILGen to generate appropriate calls to `makeIterator` and `next` witnesses. Instead of just finding a witness, solver would now: - Synthesize: - Iterator variable with its initializer - `$generator = <sequence>.makeIterator()`; - Call to `$generator.next()` which is called by each loop iteration; - Verify that type of pattern is convertible to type of `next()` Doing so significantly simplifies SILGen, removes the need to carry type information in `ForEachStmt` and enables iterating over existential types. Resolves: rdar://92177656
|
@swift-ci please test |
AnthonyLatsis
added
🍒 release cherry pick
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Cherry-pick of #59003
Change the way how
for-instatements are type-checked, where a lot ofinformation has to be recorded in a statement in order for SILGen to generate
appropriate calls to
makeIteratorandnextwitnesses.Instead of just finding a witness, solver would now:
$generator = <sequence>.makeIterator();$generator.next()which is called by each loop iteration;next()Doing so significantly simplifies SILGen, removes the need to carry type information
in
ForEachStmtand enables iterating over existential types.Resolves: rdar://92177656