Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

@kabiroberai
Copy link
Contributor

Changes are mostly standard Swift Concurrency thrash.

The one notable change is that Swift 6.2 makes metatypes non-Sendable by default (due to SE-0470 Isolated Conformances) so we need to add SendableMetatype constraints… but we have to gate these behind #if swift(>=6.2) since SendableMetatype isn't known to the 6.0/6.1 compiler.

Copy link
Owner

@saagarjha saagarjha left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

While you're at it I think these should really be one commit. I can squash it myself but if you are going to make changes you might as well do it

unxip.swift Outdated
}
}

struct MeasureFilesystemOperationAction: Sendable {
Copy link
Owner

@saagarjha saagarjha Jun 16, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I feel like it's a bug that you need this at all. Nonetheless you can just make it a static function on Files rather than needing to make a structure for it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

agreed it's a bug, I'm unsure why Swift was complaining about this. don't think it can be static because we capture the file local, but I turned it into a method on File instead.

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, yes, I had profiling disabled so I didn't spot that. I think I would prefer if this was static though since it's not relevant to any other clients of File and is only used inside of Files. Can you change this to measureFilesystemOperation(named:on:operation:) (that is, adding a file parameter) and keep it local?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yessir done

@kabiroberai kabiroberai force-pushed the swift-6-2 branch 2 times, most recently from 0f4084f to 3e98e46 Compare June 19, 2025 23:01
@kabiroberai kabiroberai requested a review from saagarjha June 19, 2025 23:01
@kabiroberai
Copy link
Contributor Author

@saagarjha i think GitHub Actions is unhappy about using secrets from the primary repo in a PR from a fork

@saagarjha
Copy link
Owner

I approved the workflow so it should have access. Sorry for messing up your branch but I'll clean it up once I figure this out

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants