-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.5k
[CodeCompletion] Duplicate existential requirements when restated #16811
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
slavapestov
merged 11 commits into
swiftlang:master
from
AnthonyLatsis:code-compl-dup-restated-requirements
Jun 15, 2018
Merged
Changes from 7 commits
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
ede3ba2
[CodeCompletion] Duplicate existential requirements when restated
AnthonyLatsis 6c13eba
Review amendments & fixed gen sig overload
AnthonyLatsis f289e46
Merge branch 'master' into code-compl-dup-restated-requirements
AnthonyLatsis bfab10b
isolate computing logic
AnthonyLatsis e0c0ad6
Merge resolved conflict
AnthonyLatsis 1d06176
review changes
AnthonyLatsis 65e8fff
remove TokenKinds.h dependency
AnthonyLatsis addc434
Merge branch 'master' into code-compl-dup-restated-requirements
AnthonyLatsis 3d3f125
restore 'public'
AnthonyLatsis ef11b11
restore completion results order stability
AnthonyLatsis f3fed2e
remove self completion from new test on type identifier
AnthonyLatsis File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why did we lose the public keyword here?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It was a bit strange but I thought it isn't a big deal since we didn't lose it on the other test. Now I see. Apparently because I am filtering without taking access levels into account. This means that, given
, completing in
class Foo: PublicProtocol, InternalProtocol
andclass Foo: InternalProtocol, PublicProtocol
will result in the removal of differentfoo
s from the look up.Thanks for pointing it out, I'll fix this by prioritizing declarations with higher access level.