[stdlib] Undo the generalization of Result.map & .flatMap for now
#72477
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
We didn’t do this for Optional’s equivalent methods yet, so it seems premature to do it for Result.
|
@swift-ci test |
|
@swift-ci test source compatibility |
|
@swift-ci 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The generalization of
Result.mapis currently causing source compatibility issues, asmapvariants defined in downstream projects are no longer considered to shadow the stdlib original. (rdar://125016028)Similar issues can affect pretty much every API generalized for
~Copyable, so the right thing to do is probably to adjust the compiler to maintain the original shadowing semantics. But for now, we can take out the cases that we see causing problems as we encounter them.We have not generalized
Optional’smapandflatMapyet, so it seems premature to do it forResult, anyway.