[Sema] Don't propagate allowsMissing to existential superclass check
#69827
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
`TypeChecker::containsProtocol` shouldn't propagate user-provided `allowMissing` to existential superclass check because the type could be `& Sendable` and `allowMissing` propagation would result in invalid builtin conformance returned for a non-conforming superclass.
xedin
requested review from
ktoso,
kavon,
AnthonyLatsis,
hborla and
slavapestov
as code owners
|
@swift-ci please 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
TypeChecker::containsProtocolshouldn't propagate user-providedallowMissingto existential superclass check because the typecould be
& SendableandallowMissingpropagation would resultin invalid builtin conformance returned for a non-conforming
superclass.