[cxx-interop] Add documentation about calling ctor or static factory of SWIFT_SHARED_REFERENCE types as Swift Initializer #1079
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
fahadnayyar
requested review from
davelester,
shahmishal,
timsneath and
tkremenek
as code owners
…of SWIFT_SHARED_REFERENCE types as Swift Initializer
fahadnayyar
force-pushed
the
cxx-frt-ctor-static-factory-docs
branch
from
b8a4ffc to
d61979c
Compare
fahadnayyar
requested review from
0xTim,
alexandersandberg,
daveverwer,
dempseyatgithub,
federicobucchi and
kaishin
as code owners
Contributor
Author
|
CC: @j-hui |
Contributor
Author
|
CC: @ravikandhadai |
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 2, 2025
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 2, 2025
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 2, 2025
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 2, 2025
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 2, 2025
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 2, 2025
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 2, 2025
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 2, 2025
j-hui
reviewed
Jul 3, 2025
documentation/cxx-interop/index.md
Outdated
| In this case, Swift will import the static `make` function as a Swift initializer: | ||
| ```swift | ||
| let object = SharedObject(id: 42) |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The id label shouldn't be there, i.e.,
Suggested change
| let object = SharedObject(id: 42) | |
| let object = SharedObject(42) |
But I think you should give more examples here. Also, doSomething() isn't really necessary here.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@j-hui Let's add more examples of using the SWIFT_NAME technique in a follow-up patch. We can experiment with this feature on some adopter projects or dummy examples before documenting.
fahadnayyar
commented
Jul 7, 2025
| let object = SharedObject(42) | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| Note that if a C++ constructor and a user-annotated static factory (using `SWIFT_NAME`) have identical parameter signatures, Swift favors the static factory when resolving initializer calls. |
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@j-hui @Xazax-hun : I'm torn between keeping this note and deleting it because it seems like I'm sharing too much information. What do you think?
Contributor
Author
|
including this in PR-1106 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Update C++ interop documentation to describe Swift initializer support for C++
SWIFT_SHARED_REFERENCEtype's constructors and static factories annotated withSWIFT_NAME.