[ABI] [Mangling] Only look for retroactive conformances in conditional reqs #21450
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
Fix to 510b64f. The mangling operator "HP" has to distinguish between "protocol" and "protocol module", not between the presence or absence of protocol-conformance-ref. New grammar: protocol-conformance-ref ::= protocol protocol-conformance-ref ::= protocol module 'HP' rdar://problem/46735592, again
Previously, the mangler searched for retroactive conformances in /any/ of a generic type's substitutions, but really we only care about the ones that affect the generic type's conformance, i.e. those that affect generic parameters. Refining this results in shorter mangled names involving instantiations of generic types. Follow-up work for rdar://problem/46735592
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test source compatibility |
|
Build failed |
|
There are a whole pile of LLDB failures on the Linux tests and I don't think they're related to this change. |
DougGregor
approved these changes
Dec 20, 2018
|
Build failed |
|
Same for the Mac bots. @swift-ci Please smoke test |
New(er) grammar:
// same module as conforming type, or non-unique
protocol-conformance-ref ::= protocol 'HP'
// same module as protocol
protocol-conformance-ref ::= protocol 'Hp'
// retroactive
protocol-conformance-ref ::= protocol module
We don't make use of this distinction anywhere yet, but we could in
the future.
|
New(er) grammar: We don't make use of this distinction anywhere yet, but we could in the future. @rjmccall Looks good now? @swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test source compatibility |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
jrose-apple
added a commit
to jrose-apple/swift
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2018
[ABI] [Mangling] Only look for retroactive conformances in conditional reqs rdar://problem/46735592
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.
Previously, the mangler searched for retroactive conformances in any of a generic type's substitutions, but really we only care about the ones that affect the generic type's conformance, i.e. those that affect generic parameters. Refining this results in shorter mangled names involving instantiations of generic types.
Builds on top of #21448. The last commit is the interesting one.
Follow-up work for rdar://problem/46735592.