[move-keyword] Make sure we error correctly on f(_move y, &y) and f(&y, _move y) #60614
+91
−2
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
…y, _move y) This was actually crashing on the inout use since I at some point changed the isReinit code to use a more general routine to determine that which was incorrect. Instead, this is actually trying to recognize reinits that we know how to change into a non-reinit form (e.x.: store [assign] -> store [init]). Since the inout use was not handled by the convert reinit to init code, we crashed. Now we get the correct behavior since the access to y always occurs /before/ the formal evaluation of the inout.
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This was actually crashing on the inout use since I at some point changed the
isReinit code to use a more general routine to determine that which was
incorrect. Instead, this is actually trying to recognize reinits that we know
how to change into a non-reinit form (e.x.: store [assign] -> store [init]).
Since the inout use was not handled by the convert reinit to init code, we
crashed.
Now we get the correct behavior since the access to y always occurs /before/ the
formal evaluation of the inout.
Replace this paragraph with a description of your changes and rationale. Provide links to external references/discussions if appropriate.
Resolves SR-NNNN.