> On Dec 30, 2016, at 2:07 PM, Jacob Bandes-Storch via swift-dev > <swift-dev@swift.org> wrote: > > This is a pretty great bug: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-3483 > <https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-3483> > > let x: Double? = 1 > > // error: ambiguous reference to member '+' > let sum = x! + x! + x! > > // error: value of optional type 'Double?' not unwrapped; did you mean > to use '!' or '?'? > let sum: Double = x! + x! + x! > > I've been poking around and I think the problem might be in > LinkedExprAnalyzer.
Yeah I think you’re onto something there. Just looking at the output of the constraint solver and where bindings are happening in matchTypes(), it looks like the constraint optimizer is trying to force the result type of both adds to ‘Double?’ rather than ‘Double’, so we only ever try to solve for that type. I haven’t looked at the constraint optimizer code in a while, so I don’t have a lot of insight into the best fix, but it’s clearly the problematic piece here. Mark > This class collects type info about elements in a chain of binary operators > to speed up constraint solving. It does so in this case by grabbing the > DeclRefExpr's type: > https://github.com/apple/swift/tree/474096b9cbd6ff7ac998d7cea41d629512e25570#L230-L239 > > <https://github.com/apple/swift/tree/474096b9cbd6ff7ac998d7cea41d629512e25570#L230-L239> > > However, since this is an ASTWalker, (I think) it automatically traverses > into the ForceValueExpr without remembering that the type it finds inside > (from the DeclRefExpr) should have one level of optionality removed when > added to the constraint system. > > This theory sort of makes sense to me, but it doesn't explain why the simpler > "let sum = x! + x!" typechecks correctly, because that goes through the same > code path. > > Am I correct that the LinkedExprAnalyzer probably needs to make sure it > doesn't keep the Optional when adding the type of a ForceValueExpr? Why > wouldn't this also cause problems for a single binop application? > > Would it be more appropriate for LinkedExprAnalyzer to be an ASTVisitor > (ExprVisitor) so that instead of just saying "yes, continue traversing > downwards" (by returning {true, expr}), its ForceValueExpr case could > recursively call visit() and then getAnyOptionalObjectType on the result? > > > Semi-eptly, > Jacob > _______________________________________________ > swift-dev mailing list > swift-dev@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
_______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
