Skip to content

Conversation

@bfahey
Copy link
Contributor

@bfahey bfahey commented Oct 23, 2025

📝 Summary

Updates the swift-syntax dependency from exact: "600.0.0" to from: "602.0.0". This change:

  • Upgrades to swift-syntax 602.0.0 for latest Swift 6 toolchain compatibility
  • Makes the version requirement more flexible by using from: instead of exact: to allow automatic compatibility with future swift-syntax patch/minor releases

🛠️ Type of Change

  • Bug fix (change that fixes an issue)
  • New feature (change that adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (bug fix or feature that is not backwards compatible)
  • Documentation (DocC, API docs, markdown files, templates, etc.)
  • Testing (new tests, updated tests, etc.)
  • Refactoring or code formatting (no logic changes)
  • Updating dependencies (Swift packages, Homebrew, etc.)
  • CI/CD (change to automated workflows)

🧪 How Has This Been Tested?

  • Ran swift build successfully with Swift 6.0 toolchain
  • Verified all existing tests pass with swift test
  • Confirmed dependency resolution works with swift-syntax 602.0.0

✅ Checklist

  • I have added relevant tests
  • I have verified all tests pass
  • I have formatted my code using SwiftFormat
  • I have updated documentation (if needed)
  • I have added the appropriate label to my PR
  • I have read the contributing guidelines
  • I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct

@bfahey bfahey requested a review from graycampbell as a code owner October 23, 2025 18:26
@bfahey bfahey added the dependencies Updates to dependencies label Oct 23, 2025
@bfahey bfahey changed the title Upgrading swift-syntax to 602.0.0 Upgrade swift-syntax to 602.0.0 Oct 23, 2025
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 23, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 87.81%. Comparing base (a2b1335) to head (8da4780).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #77      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   88.69%   87.81%   -0.89%     
==========================================
  Files          24       24              
  Lines         292      197      -95     
==========================================
- Hits          259      173      -86     
+ Misses         33       24       -9     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

.package(
url: "https://github.com/swiftlang/swift-syntax.git",
exact: "600.0.0"
from: "602.0.0"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we should keep this exact for now-- @graycampbell can probably provide more color onto why

.package(
url: "https://github.com/swiftlang/swift-syntax.git",
exact: "600.0.0"
from: "602.0.0"
Copy link
Collaborator

@graycampbell graycampbell Oct 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@bfahey I think we might want to keep exact for now. @pjtnt11 Thoughts?

Edit: lol jinx

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think from is fine here, let’s just keep an eye on things in case any issues come up

@bfahey bfahey enabled auto-merge (squash) October 23, 2025 22:46
@bfahey bfahey disabled auto-merge October 23, 2025 22:55
@bfahey bfahey merged commit 32260f2 into main Oct 23, 2025
7 of 9 checks passed
@bfahey bfahey deleted the swift-syntax/602.0.0 branch October 23, 2025 22:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

dependencies Updates to dependencies

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants