Allow overloading properties with non-overlapping availability #8386
Conversation
…ty_nonoverlapping' The test tests more than just initializers now.
|
@swift-ci Please smoke test |
| import availability_overloads_other | ||
|
|
||
| // FIXME: Should this work? | ||
| #if false |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jrose-apple I moved the BeforeAndAfter class into a separate module to make sure we can serialize this stuff properly, too.
Do you think we should be able to override these properties? I guess override checking needs a 'non-overlapping availability' check of some kind too.
This allows library authors to change the type of a computed property from one Swift version to the next.
slavapestov
force-pushed
the
non-overlapping-availability-for-properties
branch
from
1d72342 to
4da2611
Compare
slavapestov
changed the title
|
@swift-ci Please smoke test |
1 similar comment
|
@swift-ci Please smoke test |
| @@ -975,6 +976,19 @@ static void checkRedeclaration(TypeChecker &tc, ValueDecl *current) { | |||
| isAcceptableVersionBasedChange = true; | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
| // - or they are computed properties of different types, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think one of them can be a stored property, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, but what about DI? Even the unavailable property has to be initialized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's fine as long as the one that's stored is available in the current language mode.
| !currentVD->hasStorage() && | ||
| !otherVD->hasStorage() && | ||
| !currentVD->getInterfaceType()->isEqual( | ||
| otherVD->getInterfaceType())) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This seems like it might be incorrect if the "redeclaration" is across extension boundaries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You mean with generic classes and extensions? Do you have an example?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Something like this, maybe?
class A<T, U> {}
extension A {
@available(swift 4)
var x: T? { return nil }
}
extension A where T == U {
@available(swift, obsoleted: 4)
var x: U? { return nil }
}I'm just making things up; I don't actually have a test case. (I didn't try this one with your patch or anything.) It just set off warning bells.
|
Yeah I think the right thing to do is to always mangle the type with the property. I think the only time it would come up is with USRs and stored property field offset symbols (but those are not public AFAIK). I'll make a follow up patch. Thanks for the review! |
This generalizes the logic in #8009 which was recently added by @jrose-apple to allow "overloading" properties with different types as long as they have non-overlapping availability.