[BuilderTransform] Type-check buildBlock of each condition body separately from "join" operation
#79617
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
…before using in `buildEither` Fixes implementation issue where build block is type-checked as part of `buildEither(...)`. This is incorrect according to the original proposal (SE-0289), `buildBlock` should be type-checked independently and `buildEither` should have no effect on what overload of `buildBlock` gets selected.
…fore using in `buildEither` Similar to `case` statements, if chain is non-optional, let's isolate `buildBlock` of every branch into a separate type variable.
|
@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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The result builder transform proposal (SE-0289) states that
buildBlockis alwaystype-checked separately and
buildEitherandbuildOptionalno effect on its inference.There was a problem with previous implementation that allowed
buildBlockto betype-checked together with
buildOptionalin some circumstances. We'd like torectify this now and finally align the implement with the semantics stated by the proposal.
Resolves: rdar://141473488