If the type of a variable is a built-in Variant type, then it will
automatically be assigned a default value based on the type. This means
that the explicit initialization may be unnecessary. Thus this commit
removes the warning in such case.
This also changes the meaning of the unassigned warning to happen when
the variable is used before being assigned, not when it has zero
assignments.
If the left value type is known to be String, assume the format operator
(`%`) will return a string, since it works with any type in the right
hand side. This is also used by type inference even if the right hand
type is unknown at compile time.
These errors are very common when using an invalid property name
or calling on an object of the wrong type, and the previous message
was a bit cryptic for users.
Co-authored-by: Rémi Verschelde <rverschelde@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: golfinq <golfinqz@gmail.com>
Within a match statement, it is now possible to add guards in each
branch:
var a = 0
match a:
0 when false: print("does not run")
0 when true: print("but this does")
This allows more complex logic for deciding which branch to take.
Unfortunately it appears the virtual function checks in #77324 are not
trustworthy at runtime, because objects can have scripts attached, but
this information is not always available at compile-time. These checks
need to be removed.
The rest of the PR is still useful, making all method flags available to
the analyzer, so a full revert isn't necessary/desirable.
This reopens#76938, which will need another solution.
This PR does a small refactor of how method flags are handled in the GDScript analyzer.
This way, it adds support for the analyzer to use any of MethodInfo's flags, where previously
it could only use METHOD_FLAG_STATIC and METHOD_FLAG_VARARG.
As a side-effect, this also normalizes behavior between editor and release templates, which fixes#76938.
The tests added also brought a different issue to light, where using `super()` appears to generate a
return variable discarded on calling super's _init(), which doesn't have a return value. This should be
tackled in a different PR, which will have to change the output of this PR's tests.
DO NOT BATCH MERGE WITH #77324, WILL RESULT IN BROKEN CI
Currently, calling super() inside _init() throws a
RETURN_VALUE_DISCARDED warning. The analyzer identifies super() as being a
constructor, which therefore returns an object of the relevant class.
However, super() isn't really a constructor by itself: in this case, it
is _part_ of the constructor, and so doesn't "return" a value.
A test case for this is already in #77324, which contains the warning. I
am duplicating it here, without the warning, and it should conflict with
the other PR.
