fix UB in ancient test
This seems to go back all the way to the [original version of this test](b9aa9def85/src/test/run-pass/regions-mock-trans.rs) from ten years ago... ``@nikomatsakis`` trip down memory lane? ;)
Clearly deallocation is a form of mutation so doing it to a (pointer derived from a) shared reference cannot be legal. Let's use mutable references instead.
rustdoc: account for intra-doc links in `<meta name="description">`
Similar to #86451, but for the SEO descriptions instead of the search descriptions.
Enable new rlib in non stable cases
If bundled static library uses cfg (unstable) or whole-archive (wasn't supported) bundled libs are packed even without packed_bundled_libs.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #107657 (Add only modified subcommand for compiletest)
- #107864 (rustdoc: clean up `write!` calls with less stuttering)
- #107873 (Emit JSON output for the building of bootstrap itself)
- #107895 (remove redundant clones)
- #107897 (Reexported macros docs)
- #107909 (rustdoc: remove redundant `if s.is_empty()` from `find_testable_code`)
- #107912 (rustdoc: Don't resolve link to field on different variant)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Reexported macros docs
Part of #59368 (doesn't fix it, only improve the current situation a bit).
Macros were not correctly handled in reexports and the reexport attributes were not merged with the item either. This PR fixes both.
r? `@notriddle`
simplify layout calculations in rawvec
The use of `Layout::array` was introduced in #83706 which lead to a [perf regression](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83706#issuecomment-1048377719).
This PR basically reverts that change since rust currently only supports stride == size types, but to be on the safe side it leaves a const-assert there to make sure this gets caught if those assumptions ever change.
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #105019 (Add parentheses properly for borrowing suggestion)
- #106001 (Stop at the first `NULL` argument when iterating `argv`)
- #107098 (Suggest function call on pattern type mismatch)
- #107490 (rustdoc: remove inconsistently-present sidebar tooltips)
- #107855 (Add a couple random projection tests for new solver)
- #107857 (Add ui test for implementation on projection)
- #107878 (Clarify `new_size` for realloc means bytes)
- #107888 (revert #107074, add regression test)
- #107900 (Zero the `REPARSE_MOUNTPOINT_DATA_BUFFER` header)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Implement `deferred_projection_equality` for erica solver
Somewhat of a revival of #96912. When relating projections now emit an `AliasEq` obligation instead of attempting to determine equality of projections that may not be as normalized as possible (i.e. because of lazy norm, or just containing inference variables that prevent us from resolving an impl). Only do this when the new solver is enabled
Add ui test for implementation on projection
The error in full can be seen in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107263 and is part of why the PR is blocked (it still requires the approval from the team for supporting it).
r? ``@oli-obk``
Add a couple random projection tests for new solver
Self-explanatory, they're just some cases that have been on my mind in the past (especially `tests/ui/traits/new-solver/param-candidate-doesnt-shadow-project.rs`).
Mir-Opt for copying enums with large discrepancies
I have been meaning to make this for quite a while, based off of this [hackmd](https://hackmd.io/`@ft4bxUsFT5CEUBmRKYHr7w/rJM8BBPzD).`
I'm not sure where to put this opt now that I've made it, so I'd appreciate suggestions on that!
It's also one long chain of statements, not sure if there's a more friendly format to make it.
r? `@tmiasko`
I would `r` oli but he's on leave so he suggested I `r` tmiasko or wesleywiser.
Avoid exposing type parameters and implementation details sourced from macro expansions
Fixes#107745.
~~I would like to **request some guidance** for this issue, because I don't think this is a good fix (a band-aid at best).~~
### The Problem
The code
```rust
fn main() {
println!("{:?}", []);
}
```
gets desugared into (`rustc +nightly --edition=2018 issue-107745.rs -Z unpretty=hir`):
```rust
#[prelude_import]
use std::prelude::rust_2018::*;
#[macro_use]
extern crate std;
fn main() {
{
::std::io::_print(<#[lang = "format_arguments"]>::new_v1(&["",
"\n"], &[<#[lang = "format_argument"]>::new_debug(&[])]));
};
}
```
so the diagnostics code tries to be as specific and helpful as possible, and I think it finds that `[]` needs a type parameter and so does `new_debug`. But since `[]` doesn't have an origin for the type parameter definition, it points to `new_debug` instead and leaks the internal implementation detail since all `[]` has is an type inference variable.
### ~~The Bad Fix~~
~~This PR currently tries to fix the problem by bypassing the generated function `<#[lang = "format_argument"]>::new_debug` to avoid its generic parameter (I think it is auto-generated from the argument `[_; 0]`?) from getting collected as an `InsertableGenericArg`. This is problematic because it also prevents the help from getting displayed.~~
~~I think this fix is not ideal and hard-codes the format generated code pattern, but I can't think of a better fix. I have tried asking on Zulip but no responses there yet.~~
Fix implied outlives bounds logic for projections
The logic here is subtly wrong. I put a bit of an explanation in a767d7b5165cea8ee5cbe494a4a636c50ef67c9c.
TL;DR: we register outlives predicates to be proved, because wf code normalizes projections (from the unnormalized types) to type variables. This causes us to register those as constraints instead of implied. This was "fine", because we later added that implied bound in the normalized type, and delayed registering constraints. When I went to cleanup `free_region_relations` to *not* delay adding constraints, this bug was uncovered.
cc. `@aliemjay` because this caused your test failure in #99832 (I only realized as I was writing this)
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Implement some tweaks in the new solver
I've been testing the new solver on some small codebases, and these are a few small changes I've needed to make.
The most "controversial" here is implementing `trait_candidate_should_be_dropped_in_favor_of`, which I just implemented to always return false. This surprisingly allows some code to compile, without us having to actually decide on any semantics yet.
r? `@rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor`
