1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
|
// RUN: %target-typecheck-verify-swift
// RUN: %target-swift-frontend -debug-generic-signatures -typecheck %s 2>&1 | %FileCheck %s
// https://github.com/apple/swift/issues/56862
// CHECK-LABEL: Requirement signature: <Self where Self == Self.[Adjoint]Dual.[Adjoint]Dual, Self.[Adjoint]Dual : Adjoint>
public protocol Adjoint {
associatedtype Dual: Adjoint where Self.Dual.Dual == Self
}
// CHECK-LABEL: Requirement signature: <Self>
public protocol Diffable {
associatedtype Patch
}
// CHECK-LABEL: Requirement signature: <Self where Self : Adjoint, Self : Diffable, Self.[Adjoint]Dual : AdjointDiffable, Self.[Diffable]Patch : Adjoint, Self.[Adjoint]Dual.[Diffable]Patch == Self.[Diffable]Patch.[Adjoint]Dual>
public protocol AdjointDiffable: Adjoint & Diffable
where Self.Patch: Adjoint, Self.Dual: AdjointDiffable,
Self.Patch.Dual == Self.Dual.Patch {
}
// This is another example used to hit the same problem. Any one of the three
// conformance requirements 'A : P', 'B : P' or 'C : P' can be dropped and
// proven from the other two, but dropping two or more conformance requirements
// leaves us with an invalid signature.
// CHECK-LABEL: Requirement signature: <Self where Self.[P]A : P, Self.[P]A == Self.[P]B.[P]C, Self.[P]B : P, Self.[P]B == Self.[P]A.[P]C, Self.[P]C == Self.[P]A.[P]B>
protocol P {
associatedtype A : P where A == B.C
associatedtype B : P where B == A.C
associatedtype C : P where C == A.B
}
|
