GSB: When looking at protocol refinements, only consider other sources on 'Self' #37466
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
slavapestov
force-pushed
the
ban-implicit-protocol-refinement
branch
2 times, most recently
from
55c3d51 to
7457fd7
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test source compatibility |
…s on 'Self' In a protocol requirement signature, a conformance requirement on 'Self' can only be considered redundant if it is derived entirely from other sources only involving 'Self' as a subject type. What this means in practice is that we will never try to build a witness table for an inherited conformance from an associated conformance. This is important since witness tables for inherited conformances are realized eagerly before the witness table for the original conformance, and allowing more complex requirement sources for inherited conformances could introduce cycles at runtime. What used to happen is that we would emit a bogus 'redundant conformance' warning if a refined protocol conformance was also reachable via a same-type requirement involving 'Self'. Fixing this warning by removing the requirement could produce code that type checked, however it could crash at runtime. In addition to the runtime issue, such 'overly minimized' protocols could also break name lookup at compile-time, since name lookup only consults the inheritance clause of a protocol declaration instead of computing its generic signature to determine the set of refined protocols. Now, we will no longer emit the bogus redundant conformance warnings. Instead, we produce a warning if a protocol is 'overly minimized'. Since the 'overly minimized' protocols that were obtained by fixing the bogus warning would in some cases still work, we cannot diagnose the new violation as an error, to preserve source and ABI compatibility. Currently this warning fires for the SIMDScalar protocol in the standard library, and _ErrorCodeProtocol in the Foundation overlay. We should see if we can fix the protocols in an ABI-compatible way, or just add a hack to muffle the warning. Fixes https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-8198 / rdar://problem/77358480, https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-10941 / rdar://problem/77358477, https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-11670 / rdar://problem/77358476.
slavapestov
force-pushed
the
ban-implicit-protocol-refinement
branch
from
7457fd7 to
3e1e9fa
Compare
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@swift-ci Please test source compatibility |
slavapestov
added a commit
to slavapestov/swift
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 10, 2021
…Rule() With this change the RequirementMachine's minimization behavior with protocol refinement rules matches the GenericSignatureBuilder. See swiftlang#37466 for a full explanation of what's going on here.
This was referenced May 18, 2021
Closed
Closed
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.
In a protocol requirement signature, a conformance requirement on 'Self'
can only be considered redundant if it is derived entirely from other
sources only involving 'Self' as a subject type.
What this means in practice is that we will never try to build
a witness table for an inherited conformance from an associated
conformance.
This is important since witness tables for inherited conformances
are realized eagerly before the witness table for the original
conformance, and allowing more complex requirement sources for
inherited conformances could introduce cycles at runtime.
What used to happen is that we would emit a bogus 'redundant conformance'
warning if a refined protocol conformance was also reachable via a
same-type requirement involving 'Self'. Fixing this warning by removing
the requirement could produce code that type checked, however it could
crash at runtime.
In addition to the runtime issue, such 'overly minimized' protocols
could also break name lookup at compile-time, since name lookup
only consults the inheritance clause of a protocol declaration instead
of computing its generic signature to determine the set of refined
protocols.
Now, we will no longer emit the bogus redundant conformance warnings.
Instead, we produce a warning if a protocol is 'overly minimized'.
Since the 'overly minimized' protocols that were obtained by fixing
the bogus warning would in some cases still work, we cannot diagnose
the new violation as an error, to preserve source and ABI compatibility.
Currently this warning fires for the SIMDScalar protocol in the
standard library, and _ErrorCodeProtocol in the Foundation overlay.
We should see if we can fix the protocols in an ABI-compatible way,
or just add a hack to muffle the warning.
Fixes https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-8198 / rdar://problem/77358480,
https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-10941 / rdar://problem/77358477,
https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-11670 / rdar://problem/77358476.