Post not yet marked as solved
Awesome, works for me. Reads slightly cleaner, too. But yeah, can't think why they are are different. I'd love to know... I think I'll ask on the Swift forums.
In any case, thanks!
I've been running into this lately. I had SourceKitService eating 162G of memory (on an iMac with 32G of RAM). I feel like it is triggered by confusion of the compiler in certain cases. Out of frustration, and wanting to do something different, I got into a shell, and did "kill -1" to the SourceKitService. To my great delight, it stopped and restarted, and is now using a reasonable amount of memory.Dunno if this fixed things for all time, probably not, but it's nice to know there is some possible workaround.
Post not yet marked as solved
You might use the disk utility to see of there is a partition on that disk which isn't being mounted. Just a guess.
The build numbers differ in the last letter. You have installed "7" if the build tag is "11M392r" <- not 'q'That said, if they are very different, I'm not seeing it.
Post not yet marked as solved
I still had the beta 6 xip file around, so I fired it up and discovered that while beta 7 has the build of "11M392r" (and calls itself beta 6)the beta 6 we got a week before has buld tag "11M392q" <-- !The closeness in those build tags makes me think "spelling change", but I think it's a regression fix, because b6 was taking forever to do completion and code checks, and b7 is back to normal.
Post not yet marked as solved
240% for me. I filed a bug
