Remove implicit availability of Foundation from future manifest versions#5874
Merged
Conversation
neonichu
commented
Nov 4, 2022
| @@ -11,7 +11,6 @@ | |||
| //===----------------------------------------------------------------------===// | |||
|
|
|||
| import Foundation | |||
| import PackageModel | |||
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since ContextModel is part of PackageLoading and PackageDescription via a symlink, we need to import Foundation implementation-only in both modules. This is incompatible with IdentityResolver since it uses Foundation.URL as part of its public interface. To resolve this, I moved IdentityResolver into PackageModel here.
tomerd
approved these changes
Nov 4, 2022
Contributor
Author
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
Contributor
Author
Interesting... |
Contributor
|
Should a note about this be added to |
Contributor
+1 |
neonichu
force-pushed
the
fix-implicit-foundation
branch
from
8737493 to
c1d350a
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
Contributor
Author
Not entirely sure why I am not seeing these locally 🤔 |
neonichu
force-pushed
the
fix-implicit-foundation
branch
from
c1d350a to
228fd6a
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
neonichu
force-pushed
the
fix-implicit-foundation
branch
from
228fd6a to
202c4db
Compare
…sions This changes all imports of `Foundation` in the `PackageDescription` module to be implementation-only, making it so that it needs to be explicitly imported if being used. To avoid breaking existing packages, we inject an explicit import into manifests with tools-version 5.7 or earlier. In the next tools-version, `Foundation` will no longer be implicitly available. rdar://92879696
neonichu
force-pushed
the
fix-implicit-foundation
branch
from
202c4db to
c810bd7
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
@swift-ci please smoke test |
Contributor
Author
|
@swift-ci please test package compatibility |
drodriguez
added a commit
to drodriguez/swift-package-manager
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 15, 2023
Reverts 1998284 / swiftlang#3526 Related to SR-14718 (swiftlang#4416). Since swiftlang#3526 was merged, swiftlang#5874 tried to apply the original idea of using `@_implementationOnly Foundation` in PackageDescription/Plugin to avoid leaking `Foundation` into the manifests.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This changes all imports of
Foundationin thePackageDescriptionmodule to be implementation-only, making it so that it needs to be explicitly imported if being used. To avoid breaking existing packages, we inject an explicit import into manifests with tools-version 5.7 or earlier. In the next tools-version,Foundationwill no longer be implicitly available.rdar://92879696