we can otherwise assign a hidden type to the opaque which
causes ICE if we don't use `take_opaque_types` during
coherence. This is annoying so I didn't bother. Added a test
showing the behavior this prevents.
Each of `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage::{Str,Eager}` has a comment:
```
// FIXME(davidtwco): can a `Cow<'static, str>` be used here?
```
This commit answers that question in the affirmative. It's not the most
compelling change ever, but it might be worth merging.
This requires changing the `impl<'a> From<&'a str>` impls to `impl
From<&'static str>`, which involves a bunch of knock-on changes that
require/result in call sites being a little more precise about exactly
what kind of string they use to create errors, and not just `&str`. This
will result in fewer unnecessary allocations, though this will not have
any notable perf effects given that these are error paths.
Note that I was lazy within Clippy, using `to_string` in a few places to
preserve the existing string imprecision. I could have used `impl
Into<{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage>` in various places as is done in the
compiler, but that would have required changes to *many* call sites
(mostly changing `&format("...")` to `format!("...")`) which didn't seem
worthwhile.
Suppress "erroneous constant used" for constants tainted by errors
When constant evaluation fails because its MIR is tainted by errors,
suppress note indicating that erroneous constant was used, since those
errors have to be fixed regardless of the constant being used or not.
Fixes#110891.
Rename const error methods for consistency
renames `ty::Const`'s methods for creating a `ConstKind::Error` to be in the same naming style as `ty::Ty`'s equivalent methods.
r? `@BoxyUwU`
When constant evaluation fails because its MIR is tainted by errors,
suppress note indicating that erroneous constant was used, since those
errors have to be fixed regardless of the constant being used or not.
Require impl Trait in associated types to appear in method signatures
This implements the limited version of TAIT that was proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/107645#issuecomment-1477899536
Similar to `impl Trait` in return types, `impl Trait` in associated types may only be used within the impl block which it is a part of. To make everything simpler and forward compatible to getting desugared to a plain type alias impl trait in the future, we're requiring that any associated functions or constants that want to register hidden types must be using the associated type in their signature (type of the constant or argument/return type of the associated method. Where bounds mentioning the associated type are ignored).
We have preexisting tests checking that this works transitively across multiple associated types in situations like
```rust
impl Foo for Bar {
type A = impl Trait;
type B = impl Iterator<Item = Self::A>;
fn foo() -> Self::B { ...... }
}
```
Uplift `clippy::{drop,forget}_{ref,copy}` lints
This PR aims at uplifting the `clippy::drop_ref`, `clippy::drop_copy`, `clippy::forget_ref` and `clippy::forget_copy` lints.
Those lints are/were declared in the correctness category of clippy because they lint on useless and most probably is not what the developer wanted.
## `drop_ref` and `forget_ref`
The `drop_ref` and `forget_ref` lint checks for calls to `std::mem::drop` or `std::mem::forget` with a reference instead of an owned value.
### Example
```rust
let mut lock_guard = mutex.lock();
std::mem::drop(&lock_guard) // Should have been drop(lock_guard), mutex
// still locked
operation_that_requires_mutex_to_be_unlocked();
```
### Explanation
Calling `drop` or `forget` on a reference will only drop the reference itself, which is a no-op. It will not call the `drop` or `forget` method on the underlying referenced value, which is likely what was intended.
## `drop_copy` and `forget_copy`
The `drop_copy` and `forget_copy` lint checks for calls to `std::mem::forget` or `std::mem::drop` with a value that derives the Copy trait.
### Example
```rust
let x: i32 = 42; // i32 implements Copy
std::mem::forget(x) // A copy of x is passed to the function, leaving the
// original unaffected
```
### Explanation
Calling `std::mem::forget` [does nothing for types that implement Copy](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/mem/fn.drop.html) since the value will be copied and moved into the function on invocation.
-----
Followed the instructions for uplift a clippy describe here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99696#pullrequestreview-1134072751
cc `@m-ou-se` (as T-libs-api leader because the uplifting was discussed in a recent meeting)
Introduce `AliasKind::Inherent` for inherent associated types
Allows us to check (possibly generic) inherent associated types for well-formedness.
Type inference now also works properly.
Follow-up to #105961. Supersedes #108430.
Fixes#106722.
Fixes#108957.
Fixes#109768.
Fixes#109789.
Fixes#109790.
~Not to be merged before #108860 (`AliasKind::Weak`).~
CC `@jackh726`
r? `@compiler-errors`
`@rustbot` label T-types F-inherent_associated_types
enable `rust_2018_idioms` lint group for doctests
With this change, `rust_2018_idioms` lint group will be enabled for compiler/libstd doctests.
Resolves#106086Resolves#99144
Signed-off-by: ozkanonur <work@onurozkan.dev>
Support return-type bounds on associated methods from supertraits
Support `T: Trait<method(): Bound>` when `method` comes from a supertrait, aligning it with the behavior of associated type bounds (both equality and trait bounds).
The only wrinkle is that I have to extend `super_predicates_that_define_assoc_type` to look for *all* items, not just `AssocKind::Ty`. This will also be needed to support `feature(associated_const_equality)` as well, which is subtly broken when it comes to supertraits, though this PR does not fix those yet. There's a slight chance there's a perf regression here, in which case I guess I could split it out into a separate query.
Use fulfillment to check `Drop` impl compatibility
Use an `ObligationCtxt` to ensure that a `Drop` impl does not have stricter requirements than the ADT that it's implemented for, rather than using a `SimpleEqRelation` to (more or less) syntactically equate predicates on an ADT with predicates on an impl.
r? types
### Some background
The old code reads:
```rust
// An earlier version of this code attempted to do this checking
// via the traits::fulfill machinery. However, it ran into trouble
// since the fulfill machinery merely turns outlives-predicates
// 'a:'b and T:'b into region inference constraints. It is simpler
// just to look for all the predicates directly.
```
I'm not sure what this means, but perhaps in the 8 years since that this comment was written (cc #23638) it's gotten easier to process region constraints after doing fulfillment? I don't know how this logic differs from anything we do in the `compare_impl_item` module. Ironically, later on it says:
```rust
// However, it may be more efficient in the future to batch
// the analysis together via the fulfill (see comment above regarding
// the usage of the fulfill machinery), rather than the
// repeated `.iter().any(..)` calls.
```
Also:
* Removes `SimpleEqRelation` which was far too syntactical in its relation.
* Fixes#110557
Implement negative bounds for internal testing purposes
Implements partial support the `!` negative polarity on trait bounds. This is incomplete, but should allow us to at least be able to play with the feature.
Not even gonna consider them as a public-facing feature, but I'm implementing them because would've been nice to have in UI tests, for example in #110671.
