[IRGen] Respect optionality of unowned(unsafe) reference properties #65663
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
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
rdar://108705703 When generating the type info for fields marked unowned(unsafe) of an optional reference (e.g. AnyObject?), we dropped the fact that it was optional along the way. This caused incorrect tags to be returned when on object of the type was stored in an optional itself and the unowned property contained `nil`. In those cases the outer optional appeared to be `nil` as well, even if it in fact contained a value.
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
|
Hm, I tested with a simplified test case and while it fixes that one, it does not seem to fix the original issue. Looking further into it. |
|
@swift-ci smoke test |
|
@aschwaighofer Fixed the other case as well. Ready for review. |
|
@swift-ci smoke test macos |
drexin
added a commit
to drexin/swift
that referenced
this pull request
May 5, 2023
…wiftlang#65663) * [IRGen] Respect optionality of unowned(unsafe) reference properties rdar://108705703 When generating the type info for fields marked unowned(unsafe) of an optional reference (e.g. AnyObject?), we dropped the fact that it was optional along the way. This caused incorrect tags to be returned when on object of the type was stored in an optional itself and the unowned property contained `nil`. In those cases the outer optional appeared to be `nil` as well, even if it in fact contained a value. * Fix additional case
drexin
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 5, 2023
…65663) (#65701) * [IRGen] Respect optionality of unowned(unsafe) reference properties rdar://108705703 When generating the type info for fields marked unowned(unsafe) of an optional reference (e.g. AnyObject?), we dropped the fact that it was optional along the way. This caused incorrect tags to be returned when on object of the type was stored in an optional itself and the unowned property contained `nil`. In those cases the outer optional appeared to be `nil` as well, even if it in fact contained a value. * Fix additional case
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.
rdar://108705703
When generating the type info for fields marked unowned(unsafe) of an optional reference (e.g. AnyObject?), we dropped the fact that it was optional along the way. This caused incorrect tags to be returned when on object of the type was stored in an optional itself and the unowned property contained
nil. In those cases the outer optional appeared to benilas well, even if it in fact contained a value.