Print package-name in .private.swiftinterface only for better abstraction #65336
Conversation
…tion Resolves rdar://107638447
elsh
requested review from
hborla,
slavapestov,
xedin,
artemcm and
tshortli
as code owners
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
| // CHECK-PUBLIC: -module-name Utils | ||
| // CHECK-PUBLIC-NOT: -package-name swift-utils.log | ||
| // CHECK-PUBLIC: public func publicFunc() | ||
| // CHECK-PUBLIC-NOT: package func packageFunc() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would recommend to list all the CHECK-PUBLIC-NOT check lines before the CHECK-PUBLIC lines. FileCheck looks for these in order. Here it would only error if a package func packageFunc() is after public func publicFunc(). Considering the order in the sources there could be a packageFunc printed before publicFunc and it wouldn't be reported.
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
|
Is a change in https://github.com/apple/swift-driver/blob/main/Sources/makeOptions/makeOptions.cpp planned? |
Thanks for catching that @drodriguez. Yes, we need to update |
Added to driver at swiftlang/swift-driver#1344 |
…nterface only as package symbols are not contained in public swiftinterface and the clients of the swiftinterface should not be privy to the package-name input value. The change has already landed in main; this PR is to enforce the same behavior on 5.9. Risk: Low. The change has been on main already and been tested. Original PR: #65336 Reivewers: @xymus Testing: Added tests to ensure the flag is abstracted away from public swiftinterface Resolves: rdar://107638447
Print package-name in .private.swiftinterface only for better abstraction
Resolves rdar://107638447