Skip to content

[CSDiag] Don't increase candidate curry level if base is ignored #19934

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 18, 2018

Conversation

xedin
Copy link
Contributor

@xedin xedin commented Oct 18, 2018

When CandidateCalleeInfo tries to create a candidate for expression
in form of <base>.<func> it shouldn't assume that function type of
'' would always be at curry level 1, because base could be ignored
when it is a module or 'b' refers to a static function.

Resolves: rdar://problem/45242032
Resolves: SR-8987

When `CandidateCalleeInfo` tries to create a candidate for expression
in form of `<base>.<func>` it shouldn't assume that function type of
'<func>' would always be at curry level 1, because base could be ignored
when it is a module or 'b' refers to a static function.

Resolves: rdar://problem/45242032
@xedin xedin requested a review from nathawes October 18, 2018 01:37
@xedin
Copy link
Contributor Author

xedin commented Oct 18, 2018

@swift-ci please smoke test

@xedin xedin requested a review from rudkx October 18, 2018 01:38
Copy link
Contributor

@rudkx rudkx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM.

You certainly don't need to take care of this as part of your bug fix, but since we cannot do arbitrary currying anymore it seems like this should just change over to a bool of whether we have one of the cases where we have the one curry level or not.

@xedin
Copy link
Contributor Author

xedin commented Oct 18, 2018

@swift-ci Thanks, will do!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants