[swift-dev] Differences between Xcode official toolchains and tagged releases from repository

Hello, all: Is there any difference between the official toolchains included with Xcode and the tagged releases from the repository? Maybe the Xcode team is using some special flags for compilation or applying internal fixes? I ask this question because we're seeing some projects that compile fi

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 16.04 (master) #161

Drat. I need to move a file in the test case. I'll get to it once I am able to get to a keyboard. Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 3, 2016, at 3:22 AM, no-re...@swift.org wrote: > > [FAILURE] oss-swift-incremental-RA-linux-ubuntu-16_04 [#161] > > Build URL: > https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swif

Re: [swift-dev] Differences between Xcode official toolchains and tagged releases from repository

I think if you want to upload your apps to App Store, you will need the toolchain together with Xcode. Also, playground should only work with that toolchain. Zhaoxin On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Daniel Martín via swift-dev < swift-dev@swift.org> wrote: > Hello, all: > > Is there any differenc

Re: [swift-dev] Representing "address-only" values in SIL

I feel like moving in this direction is the right thing to do. Some random comments below: > On Oct 1, 2016, at 1:32 AM, John McCall via swift-dev > wrote: > > Andy Trick and I had this conversation Thursday, and I thought I'd capture it > here. > > The Problem > > It's a longstanding compl

[swift-dev] TWISt-shout Newsletter 2016-10-03

Here is your TWISt-shout Newsletter for the week of 2016-09-26 to 2016-10-02 https://github.com/pepperdog/TWISt-shout/blob/master/2016/TWISt-shout-2016-10-03.md Enjoy! -Kenny ___ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mai

Re: [swift-dev] Does it make sense to fold FreeBSD specific patches to Swift into the upstream codebase?

Hi, On 10/02/2016 13:38, Brendan Sechter wrote: > Currently the Swift source code is being patched so that it will build > on FreeBSD. Does it make sense to just fold (most of?) these changes > into the upstream Swift codebase? > That would be great. Also nice would be if there were an upstream

[swift-dev] Does it make sense to fold FreeBSD specific patches to Swift into the upstream codebase?

Currently the Swift source code is being patched so that it will build on FreeBSD. Does it make sense to just fold (most of?) these changes into the upstream Swift codebase? A total of 9 files are patched. A casual review of the patches indicates that they are all making simple modifications

Re: [swift-dev] Differences between Xcode official toolchains and tagged releases from repository

> On Oct 3, 2016, at 7:51 AM, Zhao Xin via swift-dev > wrote: > > I think if you want to upload your apps to App Store, you will need the > toolchain together with Xcode. Also, playground should only work with that > toolchain. The toolchain from swift.org should work with playground, if it do

Re: [swift-dev] Does it make sense to fold FreeBSD specific patches to Swift into the upstream codebase?

> On Oct 2, 2016, at 10:59 AM, Steve Wills via swift-dev > wrote: > On 10/02/2016 13:38, Brendan Sechter wrote: >> Currently the Swift source code is being patched so that it will build >> on FreeBSD. Does it make sense to just fold (most of?) these changes >> into the upstream Swift codebase? >

Re: [swift-dev] Does it make sense to fold FreeBSD specific patches to Swift into the upstream codebase?

> On Oct 2, 2016, at 10:59, Steve Wills via swift-dev > wrote: > > On 10/02/2016 13:38, Brendan Sechter wrote: >> Currently the Swift source code is being patched so that it will build >> on FreeBSD. Does it make sense to just fold (most of?) these changes >> into the upstream Swift codebase?

Re: [swift-dev] Representing "address-only" values in SIL

> On Oct 3, 2016, at 9:22 AM, Joe Groff wrote: > > I feel like moving in this direction is the right thing to do. Some random > comments below: > >> On Oct 1, 2016, at 1:32 AM, John McCall via swift-dev >> wrote: >> >> Andy Trick and I had this conversation Thursday, and I thought I'd captur

Re: [swift-dev] Representing "address-only" values in SIL

When I first started reading this proposal, my primary objection was going to be that SSA doesn’t seem to really jive well with the idea of values becoming (in)valid at some point in the future (due to moves). You can see this in the definite-init pass, which it works entirely with addresses to

Re: [swift-dev] Differences between Xcode official toolchains and tagged releases from repository

Yes, there are sometimes internal-only changes in the Xcode toolchains, but I wouldn't expect those to have different behavior around succeeding or failing a simple compile. Can you provide any more information? Any custom build process you've set up? Jordan > On Oct 3, 2016, at 3:34, Daniel

Re: [swift-dev] Representing "address-only" values in SIL

> On Oct 3, 2016, at 12:10 PM, Alexis via swift-dev wrote: > > When I first started reading this proposal, my primary objection was going to > be that SSA doesn’t seem to really jive well with the idea of values becoming > (in)valid at some point in the future (due to moves). You can see this

Re: [swift-dev] Representing "address-only" values in SIL

> On Oct 3, 2016, at 1:37 PM, Andrew Trick wrote: >> On Oct 3, 2016, at 12:10 PM, Alexis via swift-dev > > wrote: >> >> When I first started reading this proposal, my primary objection was going >> to be that SSA doesn’t seem to really jive well with the idea of value