[ClangImporter] Resolve forward declarations before importing names #7555
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
This allows a previously-working case of Objective-C forward-declaring a type in a /different/ Swift module to continue working, as long as the Swift context being compiled manages to import the other module properly (including its generated header). This isn't really our recommended pattern---that would be to @import the module in the bridging header and forego the forward declaration---but it doesn't cost much to keep it working. It's also a place where textual and precompiled bridging headers behaved differently, because precompiled ones are processed much earlier. https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-3798
|
@swift-ci Please test |
|
@milseman: Same question as before: is this safe for 3.1? (And is it a good patch in general?) @ematejska: After all the effort I put in to convince everyone that this was not worth doing, it turned out to be easier to implement than to diagnose. But I can look for a diagnostic if we think this is too risky for 3.1. |
|
Build failed |
|
@swift-ci Please test macOS |
jrose-apple
added a commit
to jrose-apple/swift
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 20, 2017
…wiftlang#7555) This allows a previously-working case of Objective-C forward-declaring a type in a /different/ Swift module to continue working, as long as the Swift context being compiled manages to import the other module properly (including its generated header). This isn't really our recommended pattern---that would be to @import the module in the bridging header and forego the forward declaration---but it doesn't cost much to keep it working. It's also a place where textual and precompiled bridging headers behaved differently, because precompiled ones are processed much earlier. https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-3798
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 allows a previously-working case of Objective-C forward-declaring a type in a different Swift module to continue working, as long as the Swift context being compiled manages to import the other module properly (including its generated header). This isn't really our recommended pattern—that would be to
@importthe module in the bridging header and forego the forward declaration—but it doesn't cost much to keep it working. It's also a place where textual and precompiled bridging headers behaved differently, because precompiled ones are processed much earlier.SR-3798