[Cherry-pick][6.3] Revert "Sema: Prefer the submodule import for access-levels diagnostics" #85913
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
…odule-imports Revert "Sema: Prefer the submodule import for access-levels diagnostics" (cherry picked from commit 2211824)
Member
Author
|
@swift-ci please test |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
(cherry picked from commit 2211824)
This reverts an optimisation that removes duplicated module imports, and adds a regression test that was broken by said optimisation.
This should not break any existing code, it is simply reverting back to previous behaviour.
rdar://164588082
Revert "Sema: Prefer the submodule import for access-levels diagnostics" #85468
This could cause compile times to increase.
Regression test that showed changed semantics (for a patch that should not affect semantics) has been added.
I did not wait for a reviewer to approve the original PR because it was reverting a change that was shown to be broken, and should have affected performance only.