Merge main to lsp #16825
Merged
Merge main to lsp #16825
Conversation
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
…16773) * Fix #13926 - BadImageFormatException : Bad IL format when using base * fantomas * Update src/Compiler/AbstractIL/il.fs Co-authored-by: Tomas Grosup <[email protected]> * Update src/Compiler/FSharp.Compiler.Service.fsproj Co-authored-by: Tomas Grosup <[email protected]> * Update 8.0.md --------- Co-authored-by: Tomas Grosup <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Petr <[email protected]>
* Condition source-build only stuff on source-build * Update SourceBuild.props
…ence-packages build 20240304.2 (#16810) Microsoft.SourceBuild.Intermediate.source-build-reference-packages From Version 9.0.0-alpha.1.24127.3 -> To Version 9.0.0-alpha.1.24154.2 Co-authored-by: dotnet-maestro[bot] <dotnet-maestro[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
A companion to dotnet/msbuild#9743 to ensure that more sourcelink/determinism-related flags correctly cause the compiler to be invoked when they change
#16650) * Lower integral ranges to fast while-loops * Lower for-loops over integral ranges to fast while-loops for all built-in integral types. * Lower `[start..finish]`, `[start..step..finish]`, `[|start..finish|]`, `[|start..step..finish|]` to fast integral while-loop initializers. * Add int32 tests * Update baselines * Update release notes * Fmt * Update more baselines * Typo * Update comments * Refactor for clarity * Fix debug assert * Just precompute count for all scenarios * Add missing detail to comment * Don't need to expose that * Remove bad & unneeded comparison * Comments * Better ranges * Update baselines * Use `Seq.toArray` This was failing only on net472. For some reason, `sbyte` arrays (as well as `byte` arrays, since type-testing for either will match both) were using `System.Linq.Enumerable.ToArray` instead of `Seq.toArray`. * Better name * Hmm * Hmm * Update baselines * Meh * That was it * Better comments * Clarity * Update net472 baseline * Use simpler abs * Use correctly typed (& sized) one * Handle ativeint literals properly * Handle conversions like C# does * Update baselines * Expose `mkTypedZero` & `mkTypedOne` * Update baselines * integral → numeric * Use `mkTypedOne` * Handle unspecialized cases * Add comments to range tests * Add `LowerIntegralRangesToFastLoops` lang feature * Use better name * Missed a spot * Handle MinValue..MaxValue, MaxValue..-1..MinValue * When the range is `MinValue..MaxValue`, `MinValue..1..MaxValue`, or `MaxValue..-1..MinValue`, the count will not fit in the original type's range, so we must widen it to the next-widest unsigned type. There is no easy way to do that for 64-bit types, so an overflow exception is raised at runtime. * Add tests for MinValue..MaxValue, &c. * Update baselines * Parameterize zero & one * This forces the "runtime" tests to excercise the all-runtime count calculation code. * Add more tests for range edge cases * Don't check for ovf when not needed * We don't need to check for overflow when converting the index variable to a native int to index into the array, since we know it is always less than count, and, if we've made it that far, we already know that count didn't overflow when we initialized the array. * Update baselines * Add some debug stepping samples * Add comment to help future contributors * This happened to me, and it could easily happen again :) Maybe someday these tests should be wrapped in a timeout or the like. * Handle ranges with count 2⁶⁴ + 1 * Add more comprehensive IL tests * Better to have 'em. * Remove FSharpSuite tests * It's easier to update the baselines in the component tests when needed. * Fix types * Update baselines * More sensible * This does not change behavior, but the IL doesn't look as weird. * Update baselines * Minor cleanup & clarification * Only emit runtime check for zero step once * Need that * Update baseline * Missed in merge * Update baseline * Update baselines * One more * Emit a ~better approximation of a do-while loop --------- Co-authored-by: Vlad Zarytovskii <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Tomas Grosup <[email protected]>
* up * Update optimizations-equality.md
|
⚠ This PR has merge conflicts. @0101 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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 is an automatically generated pull request from main into lsp.
Once all conflicts are resolved and all the tests pass, you are free to merge the pull request. 🐯
Troubleshooting conflicts
Identify authors of changes which introduced merge conflicts
Scroll to the bottom, then for each file containing conflicts copy its path into the following searches:
Usually the most recent change to a file between the two branches is considered to have introduced the conflicts, but sometimes it will be necessary to look for the conflicting lines and check the blame in each branch. Generally the author whose change introduced the conflicts should pull down this PR, fix the conflicts locally, then push up a commit resolving the conflicts.
Resolve merge conflicts using your local repo
Sometimes merge conflicts may be present on GitHub but merging locally will work without conflicts. This is due to differences between the merge algorithm used in local git versus the one used by GitHub.
git fetch --all git checkout -t upstream/merges/main-to-lsp git reset --hard upstream/lsp git merge upstream/main # Fix merge conflicts git commit git push upstream merges/main-to-lsp --force