Arbitrary self types v2: no deshadow pre feature.
The arbitrary self types v2 work introduces a check for shadowed methods, whereby a method in some "outer" smart pointer type may called in preference to a method in the inner referent. This is bad if the outer pointer adds a method later, as it may change behavior, so we ensure we error in this circumstance.
It was intended that this new shadowing detection system only comes into play for users who enable the `arbitrary_self_types` feature (or of course everyone later if it's stabilized). It was believed that the new deshadowing code couldn't be reached without building the custom smart pointers that `arbitrary_self_types` enables, and therefore there was no risk of this code impacting existing users.
However, it turns out that cunning use of `Pin::get_ref` can cause this type of shadowing error to be emitted now. This commit adds a test for this case.
As we want this test to pass without arbitrary_self_types, but fail with it, I've split it into two files (one with run-pass and one without). If there's a better way I can amend it.
Part of #44874
r? ```@wesleywiser```
The arbitrary self types v2 work introduces a check for shadowed
methods, whereby a method in some "outer" smart pointer type may called
in preference to a method in the inner referent. This is bad if the
outer pointer adds a method later, as it may change behavior, so we
ensure we error in this circumstance.
It was intended that this new shadowing detection system only comes into
play for users who enable the `arbitrary_self_types` feature (or of
course everyone later if it's stabilized). It was believed that the
new deshadowing code couldn't be reached without building the custom
smart pointers that `arbitrary_self_types` enables, and therefore there
was no risk of this code impacting existing users.
However, it turns out that cunning use of `Pin::get_ref` can cause
this type of shadowing error to be emitted now. This commit adds a test
for this case.
Arbitrary self types v2 attempts to detect cases where methods in an
"outer" type (e.g. a smart pointer) might "shadow" methods in the
referent.
There are a couple of cases where the current code makes no attempt to
detect such shadowing. Both of these cases only apply if other unstable
features are enabled.
Add a test, mostly for illustrative purposes, so we can see the
shadowing cases that can occur.
Various types can be used as method receivers, such as Rc<>, Box<> and
Arc<>. The arbitrary self types v2 work allows further types to be made
method receivers by implementing the Receiver trait.
With that in mind, it may come as a surprise to people when certain
common types do not implement Receiver and thus cannot be used as a
method receiver.
The RFC for arbitrary self types v2 therefore proposes emitting specific
lint hints for these cases:
* NonNull
* Weak
* Raw pointers
The code already emits a hint for this third case, in that it advises
folks that the `arbitrary_self_types_pointers` feature may meet their
need. This PR adds diagnostic hints for the Weak and NonNull cases.
The recently landed PR to adjust arbitrary self types was a bit
overenthusiastic, advising folks to use the new Receiver trait even
before it's been stabilized. Revert to the older wording of the lint in
such cases.
There's some discussion on the RFC about whether generic receivers should be
allowed, but in the end the conclusion was that they should be blocked
(at least for some definition of 'generic'). This blocking landed in
an earlier PR; this commit adds additional tests to ensure the
interaction with the rest of the Arbitrary Self Types v2 feature is as
expected. This test may be a little duplicative but it seems better
to land it than not.
In this new version of Arbitrary Self Types, we no longer use the Deref trait
exclusively when working out which self types are valid. Instead, we follow a
chain of Receiver traits. This enables methods to be called on smart pointer
types which fundamentally cannot support Deref (for instance because they are
wrappers for pointers that don't follow Rust's aliasing rules).
This includes:
* Changes to tests appropriately
* New tests for:
* The basics of the feature
* Ensuring lifetime elision works properly
* Generic Receivers
* A copy of the method subst test enhanced with Receiver
This is really the heart of the 'arbitrary self types v2' feature, and
is the most critical commit in the current PR.
Subsequent commits are focused on:
* Detecting "shadowing" problems, where a smart pointer type can hide
methods in the pointee.
* Diagnostics and cleanup.
Naming: in this commit, the "Autoderef" type is modified so that it no
longer solely focuses on the "Deref" trait, but can now consider the
"Receiver" trait instead. Should it be renamed, to something like
"TraitFollower"? This was considered, but rejected, because
* even in the Receiver case, it still considers built-in derefs
* the name Autoderef is short and snappy.
The RFC for arbitrary self types v2 declares that we should reject
"generic" self types. This commit does so.
The definition of "generic" was unclear in the RFC, but has been
explored in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/129147
and the conclusion is that "generic" means any `self` type which
is a type parameter defined on the method itself, or references
to such a type.
This approach was chosen because other definitions of "generic"
don't work. Specifically,
* we can't filter out generic type _arguments_, because that would
filter out Rc<Self> and all the other types of smart pointer
we want to support;
* we can't filter out all type params, because Self itself is a
type param, and because existing Rust code depends on other
type params declared on the type (as opposed to the method).
This PR decides to make a new error code for this case, instead of
reusing the existing E0307 error. This makes the code a
bit more complex, but it seems we have an opportunity to provide
specific diagnostics for this case so we should do so.
This PR filters out generic self types whether or not the
'arbitrary self types' feature is enabled. However, it's believed
that it can't have any effect on code which uses stable Rust, since
there are no stable traits which can be used to indicate a valid
generic receiver type, and thus it would have been impossible to
write code which could trigger this new error case.
It is however possible that this could break existing code which
uses either of the unstable `arbitrary_self_types` or
`receiver_trait` features. This breakage is intentional; as
we move arbitrary self types towards stabilization we don't want
to continue to support generic such types.
This PR adds lots of extra tests to arbitrary-self-from-method-substs.
Most of these are ways to trigger a "type mismatch" error which
9b82580c73/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/method/confirm.rs (L519)
hopes can be minimized by filtering out generics in this way.
We remove a FIXME from confirm.rs suggesting that we make this change.
It's still possible to cause type mismatch errors, and a subsequent
PR may be able to improve diagnostics in this area, but it's harder
to cause these errors without contrived uses of the turbofish.
This is a part of the arbitrary self types v2 project,
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3519https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874
r? @wesleywiser
Compiler & its UI tests: Rename remaining occurrences of "object safe" to "dyn compatible"
Follow-up to #130826.
Part of #130852.
1. 1st commit: Fix stupid oversights. Should've been part of #130826.
2. 2nd commit: Rename the unstable feature `object_safe_for_dispatch` to `dyn_compatible_for_dispatch`. Might not be worth the churn, you decide.
3. 3rd commit: Apply the renaming to all UI tests (contents and paths).
Arbitrary self types v2: pointers feature gate.
The main `arbitrary_self_types` feature gate will shortly be reused for a new version of arbitrary self types which we are amending per [this RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3519-arbitrary-self-types-v2.md). The main amendments are:
* _do_ support `self` types which can't safely implement `Deref`
* do _not_ support generic `self` types
* do _not_ support raw pointers as `self` types.
This PR relates to the last of those bullet points: this strips pointer support from the current `arbitrary_self_types` feature. We expect this to cause some amount of breakage for crates using this unstable feature to allow raw pointer self types. If that's the case, we want to know about it, and we want crate authors to know of the upcoming changes.
For now, this can be resolved by adding the new
`arbitrary_self_types_pointers` feature to such crates. If we determine that use of raw pointers as self types is common, then we may maintain that as an unstable feature even if we come to stabilize the rest of the `arbitrary_self_types` support in future. If we don't hear that this PR is causing breakage, then perhaps we don't need it at all, even behind an unstable feature gate.
[Tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874)
This is [step 4 of the plan outlined here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874#issuecomment-2122179688)
The main `arbitrary_self_types` feature gate will shortly be reused for
a new version of arbitrary self types which we are amending per [this
RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3519-arbitrary-self-types-v2.md).
The main amendments are:
* _do_ support `self` types which can't safely implement `Deref`
* do _not_ support generic `self` types
* do _not_ support raw pointers as `self` types.
This PR relates to the last of those bullet points: this strips pointer
support from the current `arbitrary_self_types` feature.
We expect this to cause some amount of breakage for crates using this
unstable feature to allow raw pointer self types. If that's the case, we
want to know about it, and we want crate authors to know of the upcoming
changes.
For now, this can be resolved by adding the new
`arbitrary_self_types_pointers` feature to such crates. If we determine
that use of raw pointers as self types is common, then we may maintain
that as an unstable feature even if we come to stabilize the rest of the
`arbitrary_self_types` support in future. If we don't hear that this PR
is causing breakage, then perhaps we don't need it at all, even behind
an unstable feature gate.
[Tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874)
This is [step 4 of the plan outlined here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874#issuecomment-2122179688)
Fix ambiguous cases of multiple & in elided self lifetimes
This change proposes simpler rules to identify the lifetime on `self` parameters which may be used to elide a return type lifetime.
## The old rules
(copied from [this comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117967#discussion_r1420554242))
Most of the code can be found in [late.rs](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/nightly-rustc/src/rustc_resolve/late.rs.html) and acts on AST types. The function [resolve_fn_params](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/nightly-rustc/src/rustc_resolve/late.rs.html#2006), in the success case, returns a single lifetime which can be used to elide the lifetime of return types.
Here's how:
* If the first parameter is called self then we search that parameter using "`self` search rules", below
* If no unique applicable lifetime was found, search all other parameters using "regular parameter search rules", below
(In practice the code does extra work to assemble good diagnostic information, so it's not quite laid out like the above.)
### `self` search rules
This is primarily handled in [find_lifetime_for_self](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/nightly-rustc/src/rustc_resolve/late.rs.html#2118) , and is described slightly [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117715#issuecomment-1813115477) already. The code:
1. Recursively walks the type of the `self` parameter (there's some complexity about resolving various special cases, but it's essentially just walking the type as far as I can see)
2. Each time we find a reference anywhere in the type, if the **direct** referent is `Self` (either spelled `Self` or by some alias resolution which I don't fully understand), then we'll add that to a set of candidate lifetimes
3. If there's exactly one such unique lifetime candidate found, we return this lifetime.
### Regular parameter search rules
1. Find all the lifetimes in each parameter, including implicit, explicit etc.
2. If there's exactly one parameter containing lifetimes, and if that parameter contains exactly one (unique) lifetime, *and if we didn't find a `self` lifetime parameter already*, we'll return this lifetime.
## The new rules
There are no changes to the "regular parameter search rules" or to the overall flow, only to the `self` search rules which are now:
1. Recursively walks the type of the `self` parameter, searching for lifetimes of reference types whose referent **contains** `Self`.[^1]
2. Keep a record of:
* Whether 0, 1 or n unique lifetimes are found on references encountered during the walk
4. If no lifetime was found, we don't return a lifetime. (This means other parameters' lifetimes may be used for return type lifetime elision).
5. If there's one lifetime found, we return the lifetime.
6. If multiple lifetimes were found, we abort elision entirely (other parameters' lifetimes won't be used).
[^1]: this prevents us from considering lifetimes from inside of the self-type
## Examples that were accepted before and will now be rejected
```rust
fn a(self: &Box<&Self>) -> &u32
fn b(self: &Pin<&mut Self>) -> &String
fn c(self: &mut &Self) -> Option<&Self>
fn d(self: &mut &Box<Self>, arg: &usize) -> &usize // previously used the lt from arg
```
### Examples that change the elided lifetime
```rust
fn e(self: &mut Box<Self>, arg: &usize) -> &usize
// ^ new ^ previous
```
## Examples that were rejected before and will now be accepted
```rust
fn f(self: &Box<Self>) -> &u32
```
---
*edit: old PR description:*
```rust
struct Concrete(u32);
impl Concrete {
fn m(self: &Box<Self>) -> &u32 {
&self.0
}
}
```
resulted in a confusing error.
```rust
impl Concrete {
fn n(self: &Box<&Self>) -> &u32 {
&self.0
}
}
```
resulted in no error or warning, despite apparent ambiguity over the elided lifetime.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117715
Go over all structured parser suggestions and make them verbose style.
When suggesting to add or remove delimiters, turn them into multiple suggestion parts.
Warn (or error) when `Self` ctor from outer item is referenced in inner nested item
This implements a warning `SELF_CONSTRUCTOR_FROM_OUTER_ITEM` when a self constructor from an outer impl is referenced in an inner nested item. This is a proper fix mentioned https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117246#discussion_r1374648388.
This warning is additionally bumped to a hard error when the self type references generic parameters, since it's almost always going to ICE, and is basically *never* correct to do.
This also reverts part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117246, since I believe this is the proper fix and we shouldn't need the helper functions (`opt_param_at`/`opt_type_param`) any longer, since they shouldn't really ever be used in cases where we don't have this problem.
This makes a small change as requested in code review, such that if there's
ambiguity in the self lifetime, we avoid lifetime elision entirely instead of
considering using lifetimes from any of the other parameters.
For example,
impl Something {
fn method(self: &Box<&Self>, something_else: &u32) -> &u32 { ... }
}
in standard Rust would have assumed the return lifetime was that of &Self;
with this PR prior to this commit would have chosen the lifetime of
'something_else', and after this commit would give an error message explaining
that the lifetime is ambiguous.
struct Concrete(u32);
impl Concrete {
fn m(self: &Box<Self>) -> &u32 {
&self.0
}
}
resulted in a confusing error.
impl Concrete {
fn n(self: &Box<&Self>) -> &u32 {
&self.0
}
}
resulted in no error or warning, despite apparent ambiguity over the elided
lifetime.
This commit changes two aspects of the behavior.
Previously, when examining the self type, we considered lifetimes only if they
were immediately adjacent to Self. We now consider lifetimes anywhere in the
self type.
Secondly, if more than one lifetime is discovered in the self type, we
disregard it as a possible lifetime elision candidate.
This is a compatibility break, and in fact has required some changes to tests
which assumed the earlier behavior.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117715
Do not suggest constraining the `&self` param, but rather the return type.
If that is wrong (because it is not sufficient), a follow up error will tell the
user to fix it. This way we lower the chances of *over* constraining, but still
get the cake of "correctly" contrained in two steps.
This is a correct suggestion:
```
error: lifetime may not live long enough
--> $DIR/ex3-both-anon-regions-return-type-is-anon.rs:9:9
|
LL | fn foo<'a>(&self, x: &i32) -> &i32 {
| - - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
| |
| let's call the lifetime of this reference `'2`
LL | x
| ^ method was supposed to return data with lifetime `'2` but it is returning data with lifetime `'1`
|
help: consider introducing a named lifetime parameter and update trait if needed
|
LL | fn foo<'a>(&self, x: &'a i32) -> &'a i32 {
| ++ ++
```
While this is incomplete because it should suggestino `&'a self`
```
error: lifetime may not live long enough
--> $DIR/ex3-both-anon-regions-self-is-anon.rs:7:19
|
LL | fn foo<'a>(&self, x: &Foo) -> &Foo {
| - - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
| |
| let's call the lifetime of this reference `'2`
LL | if true { x } else { self }
| ^ method was supposed to return data with lifetime `'2` but it is returning data with lifetime `'1`
|
help: consider introducing a named lifetime parameter and update trait if needed
|
LL | fn foo<'a>(&self, x: &'a Foo) -> &'a Foo {
| ++ ++
```
but the follow up error is
```
error: lifetime may not live long enough
--> tests/ui/lifetimes/lifetime-errors/ex3-both-anon-regions-self-is-anon.rs:7:30
|
6 | fn foo<'a>(&self, x: &'a Foo) -> &'a Foo {
| -- - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
| |
| lifetime `'a` defined here
7 | if true { x } else { self }
| ^^^^ method was supposed to return data with lifetime `'a` but it is returning data with lifetime `'1`
|
help: consider introducing a named lifetime parameter and update trait if needed
|
6 | fn foo<'a>(&'a self, x: &'a Foo) -> &'a Foo {
| ++
```
```
error: lifetime may not live long enough
--> $DIR/lt-ref-self.rs:12:9
|
LL | fn ref_self(&self, f: &u32) -> &u32 {
| - - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
| |
| let's call the lifetime of this reference `'2`
LL | f
| ^ method was supposed to return data with lifetime `'2` but it is returning data with lifetime `'1`
|
help: consider introducing a named lifetime parameter and update trait if needed
|
LL | fn ref_self<'b>(&'b self, f: &'b u32) -> &'b u32 {
| ++++ ++ ++ ++
```
```
error: lifetime may not live long enough
--> f205.rs:8:16
|
7 | fn resolve_symbolic_reference(&self, reference: Option<Reference>) -> Option<Reference> {
| - --------- has type `Option<Reference<'1>>`
| |
| let's call the lifetime of this reference `'2`
8 | return reference;
| ^^^^^^^^^ method was supposed to return data with lifetime `'2` but it is returning data with lifetime `'1`
|
help: consider introducing a named lifetime parameter
|
7 | fn resolve_symbolic_reference<'a>(&'a self, reference: Option<Reference<'a>>) -> Option<Reference<'a>> {
| ++++ ++ ++++ ++++
```
The correct suggestion would be
```
help: consider introducing a named lifetime parameter
|
7 | fn resolve_symbolic_reference<'a>(&self, reference: Option<Reference<'a>>) -> Option<Reference<'a>> {
| ++++ ++++ ++++
```
but we are not doing the analysis to detect that yet. If we constrain `&'a self`, then the return type with a borrow will implicitly take its lifetime from `'a`, it is better to make it explicit in the suggestion, in case that `&self` *doesn't* need to be `'a`, but the return does.
```
error: lifetime may not live long enough
--> $DIR/ex3-both-anon-regions-both-are-structs-2.rs:7:5
|
LL | fn foo(mut x: Ref, y: Ref) {
| ----- - has type `Ref<'_, '1>`
| |
| has type `Ref<'_, '2>`
LL | x.b = y.b;
| ^^^^^^^^^ assignment requires that `'1` must outlive `'2`
|
help: consider introducing a named lifetime parameter
|
LL | fn foo<'a>(mut x: Ref<'a, 'a>, y: Ref<'a, 'a>) {
| ++++ ++++++++ ++++++++
```
As can be seen above, it currently doesn't try to compare the `ty::Ty` lifetimes that diverged vs the `hir::Ty` to correctly suggest the following
```
help: consider introducing a named lifetime parameter
|
LL | fn foo<'a>(mut x: Ref<'_, 'a>, y: Ref<'_, 'a>) {
| ++++ ++++++++ ++++++++
```
but I believe this to still be an improvement over the status quo.
CC #40990.
