Re: [swift-dev] State of String: ABI & Performance

> On Jan 11, 2018, at 9:46 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-dev > wrote: > >>> >>> Finally, what tradeoffs do you see between a 1-word vs 2-word string? Are >>> we really destined to have 2-words? That’s still much better than the 3 >>> words we have now, but for some workloads it is a signifi

[swift-dev] preliminary Swift 5 branch

Yesterday the LLVM project created its release branch for version 6.0, and we plan to align with this branch for Swift 5.0. The swift-llvm, swift-clang, and swift-compiler-rt repos on GitHub have been updated with new branches named "swift-5.0-branch" that track the LLVM 6.0 branches. On Monday

Re: [swift-dev] Correspondence between swift-clang and Apple's Clang end user releases

> On Aug 7, 2017, at 1:55 PM, John McCall via swift-dev > wrote: > > >> On Aug 7, 2017, at 3:47 PM, Oleksii Vilchanskyi via swift-dev >> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> I would like to know when a feature >> (https://github.com/apple/swift-clang/commit/14bfc9e99e6e6903b09480a22c153032be77ae4e) >> wa

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: OSS - Swift Package - Ubuntu 16.10 (master) #1419

Unfortunately that wasn’t good enough. Without lldb building, there was a test failing on Linux. I tried disabling that test (https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/11345 ) but other things still failed. We could completely skip PR testing for Linux but t

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: OSS - Swift Package - Ubuntu 16.10 (master) #1419

We’ll temporarily remove lldb from the PR testing. > On Aug 3, 2017, at 7:04 PM, Xi Ge wrote: > > Do we a radar to keep track of this? the build error seems to be blocking our > PR testing. > > Xi >> On Aug 3, 2017, at 4:11 PM, Mishal Shah via swift-dev > > wrote: >

Re: [swift-dev] Updating stable branch to swift-4.1-branch: scheduled for Thursday, Aug. 3

ift-dev > wrote: > > Reminder: This is still on track to happen today. > >> On Jul 31, 2017, at 5:34 PM, Bob Wilson via swift-dev > <mailto:swift-dev@swift.org>> wrote: >> >> We now have a swift-4.1-branch of Clang/LLVM, and it is time to update our &g

Re: [swift-dev] Updating stable branch to swift-4.1-branch: scheduled for Thursday, Aug. 3

Reminder: This is still on track to happen today. > On Jul 31, 2017, at 5:34 PM, Bob Wilson via swift-dev > wrote: > > We now have a swift-4.1-branch of Clang/LLVM, and it is time to update our > “stable” branch to use that. This transition will merge in changes to the > S

[swift-dev] Updating stable branch to swift-4.1-branch: scheduled for Thursday, Aug. 3

We now have a swift-4.1-branch of Clang/LLVM, and it is time to update our “stable” branch to use that. This transition will merge in changes to the Swift master branch from the master-next branch that we maintain to work with upstream LLVM. We are planning to make the change this Thursday, Aug

Re: [swift-dev] State of Semantic ARC?

> On Jul 8, 2017, at 10:36 AM, Johannes Weiß via swift-dev > wrote: > > Hi swift-dev, > > I haven't heard anything about semantic ARC and couldn't really find much > documentation besides > https://gottesmm.github.io/proposals/high-level-arc-memory-operations.html . > So I wanted to ask how

Re: [swift-dev] swift.org nightlies are old

Update: we’re still working on this. We got some LLDB test failures resolved yesterday and are now looking at a SwiftPM failure. Hopefully that will be the last one…. > On May 9, 2017, at 1:19 AM, Karl Wagner wrote: > > Great, thanks! > > >> On May 8, 2017 at 6:55 am, mailto:bob.wil...@apple

Re: [swift-dev] swift.org nightlies are old

There was a problem with some test failures blocking the build. We should at least be able to xfail those tests to get things unblocked tomorrow. > On May 7, 2017, at 8:49 PM, Karl Wagner via swift-dev > wrote: > > It looks like the nightlies on swift.org haven’t been uploading properly for >

Re: [swift-dev] Renaming SILSuccessor -> SILCFGEdge

> On Apr 26, 2017, at 6:43 PM, John McCall via swift-dev > wrote: > >> On Apr 26, 2017, at 6:11 PM, Michael Gottesman wrote: >>> On Apr 26, 2017, at 1:44 PM, John McCall wrote: >>> On Apr 26, 2017, at 4:24 PM, Michael Gottesman via swift-dev wrote: Hey everyone. I

Re: [swift-dev] Renaming SILSuccessor -> SILCFGEdge

> On Apr 26, 2017, at 3:11 PM, Michael Gottesman via swift-dev > wrote: > > >> On Apr 26, 2017, at 1:44 PM, John McCall wrote: >> >>> On Apr 26, 2017, at 4:24 PM, Michael Gottesman via swift-dev >>> wrote: >>> Hey everyone. >>> >>> I am currently doing some small fixes to SILSuccessor (ad

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 14.04 - Long Test (master) #2126

Wrong group. Sorry, you’ll have to live without these awesome features for now. > On Apr 14, 2017, at 9:49 PM, Bob Wilson via swift-dev > wrote: > > The hope is that the “SkyNet” project that Marc Shifer’s team is developing > will be able to help with things like that. The “e

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 14.04 - Long Test (master) #2126

The hope is that the “SkyNet” project that Marc Shifer’s team is developing will be able to help with things like that. The “emoji hashes” in our new Jenkins 2 bots are the first step in that direction…. > On Apr 14, 2017, at 9:08 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: > > > runtime/SwiftRuntimeTests/Metadat

[swift-dev] heads-up: need to rebuild LLVM

I’m planning to merge this PR tomorrow: https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/7469 It requires a change in LLVM from about 2 weeks ago. I’ve been holding the Swift side of the change for a while to increase the chances that people will not run into prob

Re: [swift-dev] proposed change for master-next merges

> On Feb 9, 2017, at 5:49 PM, Bob Wilson via swift-dev > wrote: > > Since the feedback on this was all positive, we’re moving ahead with this > change. It seems like a good time for a status update. > > Some changes are already done: > > * We test up a test bot to

Re: [swift-dev] proposed change for master-next merges

ernative). This is even more true since it is clear that that > infrastructure would take time to develop and an incremental solution now > that improves the collaboration will not make it more difficult to develop > such a solution. > > My only strong feeling here is that I think w

Re: [swift-dev] [swift-lldb-dev] Changes to LLDB Branch Management

> On Feb 9, 2017, at 1:43 PM, Chris Bieneman via swift-dev > wrote: > >> >> On Feb 9, 2017, at 12:09 PM, Jordan Rose via swift-dev > > wrote: >> >> Hi, Chris. I’m a bit confused by these changes. Swift’s master-next isn’t >> paired with upstream-with-swift; it’s p

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - LLDB Incremental - OS X (swift 3.1) #187

use gated merges from LLVM swift-*-branch to stable > On Jan 31, 2017, at 1:20 PM, Frédéric Riss wrote: > > >> On Jan 31, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Michael Ilseman > > wrote: >> >> Thanks, could you file a radar with the details? > > I’m pretty sure there’s already one lyi

Re: [swift-dev] problem with compiler_crashers/28616-swift-parser-parseexprsequence-swift-diag-bool-bool.swift

ly we could up the number of { in the test until it crashes > reliably on all of our test machines… > > Slava > >> On Jan 19, 2017, at 6:38 PM, Bob Wilson via swift-dev >> wrote: >> >> As part of the move to reset the Clang/LLVM stable branche

[swift-dev] problem with compiler_crashers/28616-swift-parser-parseexprsequence-swift-diag-bool-bool.swift

As part of the move to reset the Clang/LLVM stable branches to their new versions, I disabled the compiler_crashers/28616-swift-parser-parseexprsequence-swift-diag-bool-bool.swift test because it was consistently failing to crash when I ran the tests locally. (It is expected to crash, so the te

Re: [swift-dev] updating Clang/LLVM stable branches

> On Jan 17, 2017, at 1:41 PM, Bob Wilson via swift-dev > wrote: > > As I mentioned yesterday, once the last swift-3.1 merge is done, we are > planning to update the stable branches for Clang/LLVM to use the new > swift-4.0 branches that are aligned with LLVM 4.0. I was

[swift-dev] updating Clang/LLVM stable branches

As I mentioned yesterday, once the last swift-3.1 merge is done, we are planning to update the stable branches for Clang/LLVM to use the new swift-4.0 branches that are aligned with LLVM 4.0. I was expecting we would do that today, but we’re going to wait until tomorrow (Wednesday) morning inste

Re: [swift-dev] Final merge from master to swift-3.1-branch

> On Jan 13, 2017, at 6:49 AM, Nicole Jacque via swift-dev > wrote: > > Hello Swift Developers- > > As outlined in Ted’s Swift 3.1 Release Process blog post, for the past month, > we’ve been periodically merging master to the swift-3.1-branch branch. We > will be doing one final merge of ma

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #7501

Yes, he renamed sil-extract to sil-func-extractor (https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/6155/files ) and missed updating some places. This should fix it: https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/6159 (FWIW, I

[swift-dev] proposed change for master-next merges

I would like to make a change in the way we handle the master-next branch. Summary: I’d like to switch to a model where we continuously test against the latest upstream LLVM changes. The goal is to simplify the process and make it easier to collaborate on maintaining master-next. Background: We

Re: [swift-dev] why are we accepting switch statements with duplicate conditions?

> On Sep 14, 2016, at 10:32 AM, John McCall via swift-dev > wrote: > >> On Sep 14, 2016, at 10:25 AM, Ted Kremenek via swift-dev >> mailto:swift-dev@swift.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> Joe Shajrawi nominated an optimizer fix for Swift 3.0.1 where the optimizer >> was crashing due to

Re: [swift-dev] compiler-rt...Wait wat?

> On Aug 17, 2016, at 5:48 AM, Ryan Lovelett via swift-dev > wrote: > > I just noticed that if you do `utils/update-checkout --clone` it pulls > down `compiler-rt`. I have been building Swift from source on Linux for > awhile now. I've never once checked out compiler-rt. Which makes me > wonder

[swift-dev] new code owner for the SIL optimizer

CODE_OWNERS.TXT still shows Nadav as the owner of the SIL optimizer, even though he is no longer working on Swift. We should have a new code owner, and I would like to nominate Erik Eckstein. There are a lot of different components to the SIL optimizer and no single person is an expert in all of

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failing: OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #5294

+ Dave > On Jul 18, 2016, at 4:55 PM, Mark Lacey wrote: > >> >> On Jul 18, 2016, at 4:43 PM, Bob Wilson via swift-dev > <mailto:swift-dev@swift.org>> wrote: >> >> I’m composing this by hand because I don’t see any notification that was >> se

[swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failing: OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #5294

I’m composing this by hand because I don’t see any notification that was sent to swift-dev. https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift-incremental-RA-osx/5294/ The failure is: /Users/buildnode/jenkins/workspace/oss-swift-incremental-RA-osx/

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: OSS - Swift Package - Ubuntu 14.04 (master) #1442

Slava fixed that in c9cd33bb. Hopefully the next run will succeed. Thanks, Slava! > On Jun 2, 2016, at 7:17 PM, Douglas Gregor via swift-dev > wrote: > > Looks like a great that should require the Objjective-C runtime. > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jun 2, 2016, at 7:01 PM, no-re...@swift.o

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - OS X (master) #3999

John, this is yours, right? > On May 11, 2016, at 3:38 PM, no-re...@swift.org wrote: > > [FAILURE] oss-swift-incremental-RA-osx [#3999] > > Build URL:https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift-incremental-RA-osx/3999/ > > Project: o