Skip to content

[+0-all-args] When diagnosing closure escapes, look through sil borrows. #14452

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

gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor

@gottesmm gottesmm commented Feb 7, 2018

I also added an option called sil-assert-on-exclusivity-failure that causes the
optimizer to assert if an exclusivity failure is hit. This enables quicker
debugging of exclusivity violations since at the assertion point, you drop
straight down into the debugger. This is only enabled with asserts.

rdar://34222540

I also added an option called sil-assert-on-exclusivity-failure that causes the
optimizer to assert if an exclusivity failure is hit. This enables quicker
debugging of exclusivity violations since at the assertion point, you drop
straight down into the debugger. This is only enabled with asserts.

rdar://34222540
@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Feb 7, 2018

@swift-ci smoke test and merge

1 similar comment
@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Feb 7, 2018

@swift-ci smoke test and merge

@atrick
Copy link
Contributor

atrick commented Feb 7, 2018

Thanks. This looks fine for now. Just a couple comments..

  • I'm not sure we we would ever need to borrow a noescape closure, but hopefully it's harmless for now.
  • I would much prefer a general debugging flag--just one flag to remember to always turn on in lldb--that always asserts at diagnostic errors, fatal errors, etc.

@swift-ci swift-ci merged commit 8b9e6ef into swiftlang:master Feb 7, 2018
@gottesmm gottesmm deleted the pr-f91f8046172eabfb9a8862b963dc81d7bc1f0591 branch February 7, 2018 18:26
@gottesmm
Copy link
Contributor Author

gottesmm commented Feb 7, 2018

@atrick I agree on both points.

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