[Concurrency] Allow conditionally conforming to Sendable when confo…
#85605
Conversation
…rmance is suppressed
For consistency with invertible protocols using `~Sendable` should
only prohibit use of unconditional extensions.
For example:
```swift
struct G<T>: ~Sendable {}
```
The following (unconditional) extension is rejected:
```
extension G: Sendable {} // error: cannot both conform to and suppress conformance to 'Sendable'
```
But conditional on `T` is accepted:
```
extension G: Sendable where T: Sendable {} // Ok!
```
xedin
force-pushed
the
tilde-sendable-cond-conformances
branch
from
c0d04c6 to
d868e68
Compare
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
|
@swift-ci please smoke test Linux platform |
|
@swift-ci please test Windows platform |
1 similar comment
|
@swift-ci please test Windows platform |
| public let x: Int | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // CHECK: #if compiler(>=5.3) && $TildeSendable |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
out of curiosity – is this meant to be a check for 5.3 or 6.3? if it is 5.3, why is that version relevant?
| check(NonSendable()) // expected-warning {{type 'NonSendable' does not conform to the 'Sendable' protocol}} | ||
| check(NoInference()) // Ok | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is there a test for how this conditional conformance behavior works with classes and inheritance? and perhaps for completion, some enum tests should be included too?
also, when messing with whatever version is on the nightly godbolt, it also seems like this is accepted on the current snapshot (57cf4ce), which seems wrong, or at least confusing:
actor A: ~Sendable {}presumably that is due to its being a ClassDecl or something.
edit: oh, and another case occurs to me – should we have a case to test a conditional Sendable conformance to another protocol that refines Sendable?
2 participants
…rmance is suppressed
For consistency with invertible protocols using
~Sendableshould only prohibit use of unconditional extensions.For example:
The following (unconditional) extension is rejected:
But conditional on
Tis accepted: