Skip to content

[4.0] TBD including all files from a full build. #11136

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

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
Jul 26, 2017

Conversation

huonw
Copy link
Contributor

@huonw huonw commented Jul 24, 2017

#10861 , #10724 , and #11142 .

Explanation: TBDGen now includes all the exported symbols encountered while building the standard library and test suite.
Scope: Future users of TBD files, as there's no functionality change outside of it.
Radar: rdar://problem/32252869 and its subtasks.
Risk: Low: the only changes outside of TBDGen are tightening the linkage of some symbols, which people shouldn't be relying on.
Testing: CI and local testing with TBD validation turned on by default (which this PR doesn't include, as that could break user's build).

huonw added 3 commits July 21, 2017 15:54
It is only top-level globals in the main file that do not have
accessors, something like class Foo { static var x = 0 } has them no
matter where it is.

Fixes rdar://problem/32391290 .
This is a vast overestimate, but is better than missing some.

rdar://problem/32254773
@huonw
Copy link
Contributor Author

huonw commented Jul 24, 2017

@swift-ci Please test.

huonw added 7 commits July 24, 2017 15:10
…ivate.

If the closure is serialized, it needs to be shared.
These were accidentally left as `extern` rather than the correct `static` or
`static inline` (etc.).
… linkage.

Previously this would mean that specialization of a public function are public,
which is incorrect.
@huonw huonw force-pushed the symbol-list-10-4.0 branch from 1d04bc9 to e1e48ab Compare July 24, 2017 22:11
@huonw
Copy link
Contributor Author

huonw commented Jul 24, 2017

@swift-ci Please test.

@slavapestov could you review this for 4.0? (It includes the proper materializeForSet closure change.)

@huonw
Copy link
Contributor Author

huonw commented Jul 25, 2017

@swift-ci Please test.

@swift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

Build failed
Jenkins build - Swift Test OS X Platform
Git Commit - 1d04bc96951bec54fe796ba45dcf95f72fcaef98
Test requested by - @huonw

@swift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

Build failed
Jenkins build - Swift Test Linux Platform
Git Commit - 1d04bc96951bec54fe796ba45dcf95f72fcaef98
Test requested by - @huonw

@slavapestov
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

@ematejska ematejska merged commit 707b416 into swiftlang:swift-4.0-branch Jul 26, 2017
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.

4 participants