Paths are mostly parsed without taking whitespaces into account, e.g. `std :: vec :: Vec :: new ()` parses successfully, however, there are some special cases involving keywords `super`, `self` and `Self`. For example, `self::` is considered a path start only if there are no spaces between `self` and `::`. These restrictions probably made sense when `self` and friends weren't keywords, but now they are unnecessary.
The first two commits remove this special treatment of whitespaces by removing `token::IdentStyle` entirely and therefore fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/14109.
This change also affects naked `self` and `super` (which are not tightly followed by `::`, obviously) they can now be parsed as paths, however they are still not resolved correctly in imports (cc @jseyfried, see `compile-fail/use-keyword.rs`), so https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29036 is not completely fixed.
The third commit also makes `super`, `self`, `Self` and `static` keywords nominally (before this they acted as keywords for all purposes) and removes most of remaining \"special idents\".
The last commit (before tests) contains some small improvements - some qualified paths with type parameters are parsed correctly, `parse_path` is not used for parsing single identifiers, imports are sanity checked for absence of type parameters - such type parameters can be generated by syntax extensions or by macros when https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/10415 is fixed (~~soon!~~already!).
This patch changes some pretty basic things in `libsyntax`, like `token::Token` and the keyword list, so it's a plugin-[breaking-change].
r? @eddyb
syntax: Merge PathParsingMode::NoTypesAllowed and PathParsingMode::ImportPrefix
syntax: Rename PathParsingMode and its variants to better express their purpose
syntax: Remove obsolete error message about 'self lifetime
syntax: Remove ALLOW_MODULE_PATHS workaround
syntax/resolve: Adjust some error messages
resolve: Compare unhygienic (not renamed) names with keywords::Invalid, invalid identifiers may appear to be valid after renaming
Implement `pub(restricted)` privacy (RFC 1422)
This implements `pub(restricted)` privacy from RFC 1422 (cc #32409) behind a feature gate.
`pub(restricted)` paths currently cannot use re-exported modules both for simplicity of implementation and for future compatibility with RFC 1560 (cf #31783).
r? @nikomatsakis
[breaking-batch] Add support for `pub(restricted)` syntax in the AST
This PR allows the AST to represent the `pub(restricted)` syntax from RFC 1422 (cc #32409).
More specifically, it makes `ast::Visibility` non-`Copy` and adds two new variants, `Visibility::Crate` for `pub(crate)` and `Visitibility::Restricted { path: P<Path>, id: NodeId }` for `pub(path)`.
plugin-[breaking-change] cc #31645
r? @pnkfelix
Prevent bumping the parser past the EOF.
Makes `Parser::bump` after EOF into an ICE, forcing callers to avoid repeated EOF bumps.
This ICE is intended to break infinite loops where EOF wasn't stopping the loop.
For example, the handling of EOF in `parse_trait_items`' recovery loop fixes#32446.
But even without this specific fix, the ICE is triggered, which helps diagnosis and UX.
This is a `[breaking-change]` for plugins authors who eagerly eat multiple EOFs.
See https://github.com/docopt/docopt.rs/pull/171 for such an example and the necessary fix.
melt the ICE when lowering an impossible range
Emit a fatal error instead of panicking when HIR lowering encounters a range with no `end` point.
This involved adding a method to wire up `LoweringContext::span_fatal`.
Fixes#32245 (cc @nodakai).
r? @nrc
Automated conversion using the untry tool [1] and the following command:
```
$ find -name '*.rs' -type f | xargs untry
```
at the root of the Rust repo.
[1]: https://github.com/japaric/untry
Make errors for unnecessary visibility qualifiers consistent
This PR refactors away `syntax::parse::parser::ParsePub` so that unnecessary visibility qualifiers on variant fields are reported not by the parser but by `privacy::SanePrivacyVisitor` (thanks to @petrochenkov's drive-by improvements in #31919).
r? @nikomatsakis
The `?` postfix operator is sugar equivalent to the try! macro, but is more amenable to chaining:
`File::open("foo")?.metadata()?.is_dir()`.
`?` is accepted on any *expression* that can return a `Result`, e.g. `x()?`, `y!()?`, `{z}?`,
`(w)?`, etc. And binds more tightly than unary operators, e.g. `!x?` is parsed as `!(x?)`.
cc #31436
This PR implements [RFC 1192](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1192-inclusive-ranges.md), which is triple-dot syntax for inclusive range expressions. The new stuff is behind two feature gates (one for the syntax and one for the std::ops types). This replaces the deprecated functionality in std::iter. Along the way I simplified the desugaring for all ranges.
This is my first contribution to rust which changes more than one character outside of a test or comment, so please review carefully! Some of the individual commit messages have more of my notes. Also thanks for putting up with my dumb questions in #rust-internals.
- For implementing `std::ops::RangeInclusive`, I took @Stebalien's suggestion from https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1192#issuecomment-137864421. It seemed to me to make the implementation easier and increase type safety. If that stands, the RFC should be amended to avoid confusion.
- I also kind of like @glaebhoerl's [idea](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1254#issuecomment-147815299), which is unified inclusive/exclusive range syntax something like `x>..=y`. We can experiment with this while everything is behind a feature gate.
- There are a couple of FIXMEs left (see the last commit). I didn't know what to do about `RangeArgument` and I haven't added `Index` impls yet. Those should be discussed/finished before merging.
cc @Gankro since you [complained](https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/3xkfro/what_happened_to_inclusive_ranges/cy5j0yq)
cc #27777#30877rust-lang/rust#1192rust-lang/rfcs#1254
relevant to #28237 (tracking issue)
