[4.1][CSBindings] Look through optional types when trying to validate l-va… #14490
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 |
|
@swift-ci please test source compatibility |
xedin
changed the title
…lueness of the new bindings When bindings are picked for particular type variable, right-hand side of the binding might be another type variable wrapped into optional type, when trying to determine if both sides of the binding have the same l-valueness it's imperative to look throught optional type of the right-hand side. Otherwise new binding might be effectively unsolvable. Resolves: rdar://problem/37291371 (cherry picked from commit c6ff7b4)
xedin
force-pushed
the
rdar-37291371-4.1
branch
from
28611dd to
cdc2902
Compare
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
@swift-ci please test source compatibility |
|
@swift-ci please nominate |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
…lueness of the new bindings
• Explanation: When bindings are picked for particular type variable, right-hand
side of the binding might be another type variable wrapped into optional
type, when trying to determine if both sides of the binding have the
same l-valueness it's imperative to look through optional type of the
right-hand side. Otherwise new binding might be effectively unsolvable.
• Scope of Issue: Affects logic related to picking bindings for type variables in constraint solver.
• Origination: Looks like this might be caused by re-work which happened when
mustBeMaterializablehas been split.• Risk: Low risk; Fixes a bug in constraint solver.
• Reviewed By: @rudkx
• Testing: Compiler regression tests
• Radar / SR: rdar://problem/37291371
Resolves: rdar://problem/37291371
(cherry picked from commit c6ff7b4)