starred/CoreStore-JohnEstropia
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/JohnEstropia/CoreStore.git synced 2026-01-14 07:33:28 +01:00
Code Issues 95 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

operator redeclaration make verification fail of swiftinterface #412

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:26:40 +01:00 by adam · 6 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:26:40 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @JCSooHwanCho on GitHub (Jun 14, 2023).

in addition to #480 , operator redeclaration made verification fail of .swiftinterface file. It can be resolved with only one declaration in module.

error: verify-emitted-module-interface command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation)
CoreStore/CoreStore.swiftinterface:3365:16: error: operator redeclared
infix operator .= : AssignmentPrecedence
               ^
CoreStore/CoreStore.swiftinterface:3326:16: note: previous operator declaration here
infix operator .= : AssignmentPrecedence
               ^
CoreStore/CoreStore.swiftinterface:3366:16: error: operator redeclared
infix operator .== : ComparisonPrecedence
               ^
CoreStore/CoreStore.swiftinterface:3327:16: note: previous operator declaration here
infix operator .== : ComparisonPrecedence
Originally created by @JCSooHwanCho on GitHub (Jun 14, 2023). in addition to #480 , operator redeclaration made verification fail of .swiftinterface file. It can be resolved with only one declaration in module. ``` error: verify-emitted-module-interface command failed with exit code 1 (use -v to see invocation) CoreStore/CoreStore.swiftinterface:3365:16: error: operator redeclared infix operator .= : AssignmentPrecedence ^ CoreStore/CoreStore.swiftinterface:3326:16: note: previous operator declaration here infix operator .= : AssignmentPrecedence ^ CoreStore/CoreStore.swiftinterface:3366:16: error: operator redeclared infix operator .== : ComparisonPrecedence ^ CoreStore/CoreStore.swiftinterface:3327:16: note: previous operator declaration here infix operator .== : ComparisonPrecedence ```
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:26:40 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:26:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@JohnEstropia commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023):

Interesting. Can you tell me how (SPM, Cocoapods, etc.) you are importing CoreStore into your dependencies?

@JohnEstropia commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023): Interesting. Can you tell me how (SPM, Cocoapods, etc.) you are importing CoreStore into your dependencies?
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:26:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@JCSooHwanCho commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023):

I made it as static .xcframework using bazel.

  1. use http_archive rule to download repository
  2. to build it as static framework using Line's rule(ios_static_framework)

In fact, there is a workaround. That is giving an no-verify-emitted-module-interface option to compiler. But I think it should be not user's concern.

@JCSooHwanCho commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023): I made it as static .xcframework using bazel. 1. use [http_archive](https://bazel.build/rules/lib/repo/http#http_archive) rule to download repository 2. to build it as static framework using [Line's rule(ios_static_framework)](https://github.com/line/rules_apple_line/blob/main/apple/swift_static_framework.bzl) In fact, there is a workaround. That is giving an `no-verify-emitted-module-interface` option to compiler. But I think it should be not user's concern.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:26:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@JohnEstropia commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023):

In fact, there is a workaround. That is giving an no-verify-emitted-module-interface option to compiler. But I think it should be not user's concern.

I'm not very familiar with Bezel, but I'm not sure there is a way library authors can specify compiler directives when the code is compiled as a static library. The formally supported installation modes build frameworks instead of a static lib, so I think this should be handled on the API users' side.

On that note, the specific issue on operators can be avoided at least, since CoreStore can just declare it once for the whole module. I'll push something later just to avoid this case, but I'd warn that this fix is local to CoreStore. If an external static library declares their own .= and .== operators it's likely you will have this same issue anyway.

@JohnEstropia commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023): > In fact, there is a workaround. That is giving an `no-verify-emitted-module-interface` option to compiler. But I think it should be not user's concern. I'm not very familiar with Bezel, but I'm not sure there is a way library authors can specify compiler directives when the code is compiled as a static library. The [formally supported installation modes](https://github.com/JohnEstropia/CoreStore#installation) build frameworks instead of a static lib, so I think this should be handled on the API users' side. On that note, the specific issue on operators can be avoided at least, since CoreStore can just declare it once for the whole module. I'll push something later just to avoid this case, but I'd warn that this fix is local to CoreStore. If an external static library declares their own `.=` and `.==` operators it's likely you will have this same issue anyway.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:26:42 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@JCSooHwanCho commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023):

Conflicting with other module is just potential problem, but conflicting within module is present problem. How about focusing on present problem?

@JCSooHwanCho commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023): Conflicting with other module is just potential problem, but conflicting within module is present problem. How about focusing on present problem?
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:26:42 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@JohnEstropia commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023):

Yes, I mentioned here:

I'll push something later just to avoid this case, but I'd warn that this fix is local to CoreStore

Feel free to make a PR ahead, if you have time.

@JohnEstropia commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023): Yes, I mentioned here: > I'll push something later just to avoid this case, but I'd warn that this fix is local to CoreStore Feel free to make a PR ahead, if you have time.
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:26:42 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@JCSooHwanCho commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023):

I'll make it. Thanks for quick reply!

@JCSooHwanCho commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2023): I'll make it. Thanks for quick reply!
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
abandoned
corestore bug
discussion
duplicate
enhancement
fixed
fixed
help wanted
in progress
investigating
ios/compiler bug
irreproducible
looking for workarounds
not a bug
pending
pending docs update
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
regression
user bug
wontfix
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/CoreStore-JohnEstropia#412
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?