Skip to content

Reapply "[SwiftLexicalLookup] New unqualified lookup implementation validation" #78335

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

Conversation

rintaro
Copy link
Member

@rintaro rintaro commented Dec 21, 2024

With linking AST wit hASTGen

…0-swift-lexical-lookup-validation"

This reverts commit ae88aac, reversing
changes made to b0123bc.
AST uses several 'swift_ASTGen_*' functions. It does depend on ASTGen,
so there's cyclic references. Not ideal though.
@rintaro
Copy link
Member Author

rintaro commented Dec 21, 2024

@swift-ci Please Build Toolchain Ubuntu 24.04

@rintaro
Copy link
Member Author

rintaro commented Dec 21, 2024

@swift-ci Please smoke test

@bnbarham
Copy link
Contributor

bnbarham commented Jan 3, 2025

CC @MAJKFL turns out that this doesn't actually introduce any cycle that isn't already there.

@rintaro could you add the new library to swift-installer-scripts? https://github.com/swiftlang/swift-installer-scripts/blob/6cecc7c46d1170a3bc3e1ff8838181418e037397/platforms/Windows/bld/bld.wxs#L418

@rintaro
Copy link
Member Author

rintaro commented Jan 3, 2025

swiftlang/swift-installer-scripts#360
@swift-ci Please smoke test

@rintaro
Copy link
Member Author

rintaro commented Jan 3, 2025

swiftlang/swift-installer-scripts#360
@swift-ci Please build toolchain Windows

Copy link
Contributor

@MAJKFL MAJKFL left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

CC @MAJKFL turns out that this doesn't actually introduce any cycle that isn't already there.

Thank you @bnbarham and @rintaro so much for investigating and finding the fix! I hope it wasn't too much trouble for you.

Loose thought: Would it be a good idea to include some kind of check for this in the ci to catch this issue earlier on in the future? Would it be feasible?

@rintaro rintaro merged commit 660a2ea into swiftlang:main Jan 6, 2025
5 checks passed
@rintaro
Copy link
Member Author

rintaro commented Jan 6, 2025

Would it be a good idea to include some kind of check for this in the ci to catch this issue earlier on in the future? Would it be feasible?

With my understanding we're not PR testing gold linker at all. We should switch to Ubuntu 24.04 (from 20.04) for PR testing. cc: @shahmishal

@bnbarham
Copy link
Contributor

bnbarham commented Jan 6, 2025

Yeah, IMO we run into more issues with gold than with lld, so it probably makes more sense to use 24.04 rather than 20.04.

@rintaro rintaro deleted the revert-revert-77140-swift-lexical-lookup-validation branch January 7, 2025 04:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants