Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 2. Swift Source Compatibility Suite (master) #1014

To follow up on this thread, I reverted #13597 (the profiling refactor) because I couldn't get a clean run of the source compat suite. It looks like there's an issue unrelated to #13597 causing a few failures: https://ci.swift.org/view/Source%20Compatibility/job/swift-master-source-compat-suite/

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 0. OSS - Swift Incremental RA - Ubuntu 16.10 (master) #2175

This should be fixed by https://github.com/apple/swift/pull/13733 Mark > On Jan 4, 2018, at 12:29 PM, swift...@swift.org wrote: > > [FAILURE] oss-swift-incremental-RA-linux-ubuntu-16_10 [#2175] > > Build URL: > https://ci.swift.org/job/oss-swift-

Re: [swift-dev] "available externally" vs build time

> On Jan 2, 2018, at 1:08 PM, Slava Pestov via swift-dev > wrote: > > > >> On Dec 28, 2017, at 4:32 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-dev >> wrote: >> >> Folks working on the SIL optimizer, particularly those interested in faster >> builds: >> >> If I understand the SIL optimizer correctly, i

Re: [swift-dev] "available externally" vs build time

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 1:08 PM, Erik Eckstein wrote: > > > >> On Jan 2, 2018, at 1:08 PM, Slava Pestov via swift-dev >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Dec 28, 2017, at 4:32 PM, Chris Lattner via swift-dev >>> wrote: >>> >>> Folks working on the SIL optimizer, particularly those interested in fa

Re: [swift-dev] [Swift CI] Build Failure: 2. Swift Source Compatibility Suite (master) #1014

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 11:14 AM, Vedant Kumar wrote: > > To follow up on this thread, I reverted #13597 (the profiling refactor) > because I couldn't get a clean run of the source compat suite. > > It looks like there's an issue unrelated to #13597 causing a few failures: > https://ci.swift.or

Re: [swift-dev] "available externally" vs build time

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 1:14 PM, Slava Pestov wrote: > > > >> On Jan 4, 2018, at 1:08 PM, Erik Eckstein > > wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Jan 2, 2018, at 1:08 PM, Slava Pestov via swift-dev >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Dec 28, 2017, at 4:

[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] "available externally" vs build time

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 1:08 PM, Erik Eckstein wrote: >>> 1. It looks like the MandatoryInliner is the biggest culprit at -O0 here: >>> it deserializes the referenced function (MandatoryInlining.cpp:384) and >>> *then* checks to see if the callee is @_transparent. Would it make sense >>> to chang

Re: [swift-dev] "available externally" vs build time

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 2:11 PM, Erik Eckstein via swift-dev > wrote: > >>> >>> Well, with our pass pipeline architecture I suspect it will not make a >>> difference. We process functions bottom-up. For example, the performance >>> inliner optimizes the callee first before trying to inline it (

Re: [swift-dev] SILNode versus C++

> On Dec 16, 2017, at 10:31 AM, John McCall via swift-dev > wrote: > >> >> On Dec 16, 2017, at 9:08 AM, David Zarzycki via swift-dev >> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I’m trying to improve SILNode memory layout density by adopting the AST >> bitfield macros. Unfortunately, multiple inheritanc

Re: [swift-dev] SILNode versus C++

Hi Adrian, Feel free to file a bug if you’re motivated. Personally speaking, I don’t expect this bug to be on anybody’s priority list. The workaround of using named structs/unions has no downside for most projects, and Swift is no exception. Dave -- Sent from my iPad > On Jan 4, 2018, at 20:

Re: [swift-dev] SILNode versus C++

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 8:29 PM, David Zarzycki wrote: > > Hi Adrian, > > Feel free to file a bug if you’re motivated. Personally speaking, I don’t > expect this bug to be on anybody’s priority list. The workaround of using > named structs/unions has no downside for most projects, and Swift is n

Re: [swift-dev] "available externally" vs build time

> On Jan 4, 2018, at 4:57 PM, Chris Lattner wrote: > >> On Jan 4, 2018, at 1:08 PM, Erik Eckstein > > wrote: 1. It looks like the MandatoryInliner is the biggest culprit at -O0 here: it deserializes the referenced function (MandatoryInlining.cpp:384) and