Generic type alias access level regression [4.2 04/30/2018] #16585
Conversation
In Swift 3 mode, the canonical private DeclContext should not look through extensions. The only way I can reproduce this is with a missing warning and we don't really care about missing warnings in Swift 3 mode. However, the next patch in this PR regresses more things so let's fix it properly.
If a property had an inferred type that is a generic type alias, we weren't checking the access level of the generic arguments. This used to work in 4.1 because we didn't have a sugared representation for generic type aliases, so we were checking the substituted underlying type here. But now that NameAliasType can store generic arguments, make sure we visit them here. Fixes <rdar://problem/40188409>.
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
Build failed |
|
The test failures are not mine... |
|
Those test failures are specific to one machine... |
|
@swift-ci please test |
|
Oops forgot the "macOS platform" there, ah well. The macOS tests are running on a different machine this time though. |
|
@swift-ci please nominate Description: Fixes a regression with access level checking from recent work on generic typealiases in the 4.2 branch. Scope of the issue: Code that was correctly rejected in 4.1 was being accepted, which could cause linker errors if someone tried to rely on the incorrect behavior. Origination: Slava noticed this by inspection while working on other changes. Risk: Low, it's a simple change. Tested: New test added. Reviewed by: @DougGregor or @jrose-apple Radar: rdar://problem/40188409. |
Description: Fixes a regression with access level checking from recent work on generic typealiases in the 4.2 branch.
Scope of the issue: Code that was correctly rejected in 4.1 was being accepted, which could cause linker errors if someone tried to rely on the incorrect behavior.
Origination: I noticed this by inspection while working on other changes.
Risk: Low, it's a simple change.
Tested: New test added.
Reviewed by: @DougGregor or @jrose-apple
Radar: rdar://problem/40188409.