Add support for availability-style features #9815
Conversation
ahatanaka
force-pushed
the
feature-availability
branch
from
9c6c6b4 to
6b1eb91
Compare
ahatanaka
force-pushed
the
feature-availability
branch
2 times, most recently
from
db3f142 to
e959883
Compare
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
ahatanaka
force-pushed
the
feature-availability
branch
from
e959883 to
ffd2237
Compare
clang/lib/AST/StmtPrinter.cpp
Outdated
| @@ -630,6 +630,10 @@ void StmtPrinter::VisitObjCAvailabilityCheckExpr( | |||
| OS << "@available(...)"; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| void StmtPrinter::VisitObjCFeatureCheckExpr(ObjCFeatureCheckExpr *Node) { | |||
| OS << "@feature(...)"; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think the body was elided on @available(...) because the AST doesn't retain full fidelity of the availability check and instead it drops the other platforms. Do we have that same problem with @feature()? If not, I think this should print the actual feature too, so you can write a test that checks it round-trips through serialization.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've changed this to use @available instead of introducing a new keyword but haven't made any changes to StmtPrinter yet.
| @@ -3999,6 +4008,23 @@ std::optional<AvailabilitySpec> Parser::ParseAvailabilitySpec() { | |||
| Actions.CodeCompletion().CodeCompleteAvailabilityPlatformName(); | |||
| return std::nullopt; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| if (Tok.is(tok::identifier) && GetLookAheadToken(1).is(tok::equal)) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you make it tok::colon instead? I think it's too late to change the feat: one, and it would be nice if they matched.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, domain:feature1 would be okay too.
rdar://137999979
ahatanaka
force-pushed
the
feature-availability
branch
from
ffd2237 to
cd0efbe
Compare
rdar://137999979