[move-keyword] Change from using a move function -> move keyword. #60404
Conversation
|
@swift-ci test |
| @@ -357,6 +367,13 @@ static void diagSyntacticUseRestrictions(const Expr *E, const DeclContext *DC, | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| void checkMoveExpr(MoveExpr *moveExpr) { | |||
| if (!isa<DeclRefExpr>(moveExpr->getSubExpr())) { | |||
| Ctx.Diags.diagnose(moveExpr->getLoc(), | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jckarter do you think I need to check for more things here? When I talked with @DougGregor he mentioned to check that this check also catches field accesses (which it does)... but I figured I would ask out of an abundance of caution.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure that we need an ironclad AST-level diagnostic here, since we will still need a diagnostic in SIL anyway to detect lvalues that can't be statically moved. So I think this is fine to reject obviously unsupportable cases.
|
Another additional nice thing is that b/c the SILGen emission always works pretty much how I want it, I don't need to rely upon the move function canonicalization pass. I am going to rip that out in a subsequent PR. |
gottesmm
force-pushed
the
pr-4dfd8089258ab2b78ff84b6ac4f4c425b321653d
branch
from
085642c to
ae00539
Compare
|
Test failed b/c in the mean time someone added another syntax node so there was a node numbering collision. I just rebased/added one to MoveExpr's serialization number. |
|
@swift-ci test |
gottesmm
force-pushed
the
pr-4dfd8089258ab2b78ff84b6ac4f4c425b321653d
branch
from
ae00539 to
2874760
Compare
|
@swift-ci test |
gottesmm
force-pushed
the
pr-4dfd8089258ab2b78ff84b6ac4f4c425b321653d
branch
from
2874760 to
c670516
Compare
It doesn't do anything yet.
I did this by requiring this in the typechecker. This will ensure that when we emit a move, we are guaranteed to have a value decl ref that we can evaluate. It also ensures that we can't _move fields. auto
…emission. I also updated the move function tests to show that this is working. As a nice bonus, I was able to enable all of the tests also in a non-optimized stdlib.
gottesmm
force-pushed
the
pr-4dfd8089258ab2b78ff84b6ac4f4c425b321653d
branch
from
c670516 to
e9d8f36
Compare
|
Swift syntax PR: swiftlang/swift-syntax#563 |
|
@gottesmm This is breaking a library I actively maintain. There is a function called Reported in: #60492 Final reproducer: #60492 (comment) If this is desired behavior, could we incorporate my reproducer into the Swift test suite, so that it's explicit that we want such code to fail? |
|
@philipturner I actually put it behind an option in a subsequent so it shouldn't break you. The final name is still under discussion, but once that is finalized, I am happy to add a test. |
|
I already escaped |
This PR does 2 things: