Implement MIR opt unit tests
This implements rust-lang/compiler-team#502 .
There's not much to say here, this implementation does everything as proposed. I also added the flag to a bunch of existing tests (mostly those to which I could add it without causing huge diffs due to changes in line numbers). Summarizing the changes to test outputs:
- Every time an `MirPatch` is created, it adds a cleanup block to the body if it did not exist already. If this block is unused (as is usually the case), it usually gets removed soon after by some pass calling `SimplifyCFG` for unrelated reasons (in many cases this cycle happens quite a few times for a single body). We now run `SimplifyCFG` less often, so those blocks end up in some of our outputs. I looked at changing `MirPatch` to not do this, but that seemed too complicated for this PR. I may still do that in a follow-up.
- The `InstCombine` test had set `-C opt-level=0` in its flags and so there were no storage markers. I don't really see a good motivation for doing this, so bringing it back in line with what everything else does seems correct.
- One of the `EarlyOtherwiseBranch` tests had `UnreachableProp` running on it. Preventing that kind of thing is the goal of this feature, so this seems fine.
For the remaining tests for which this feature might be useful, we can gradually migrate them as opportunities present themselves.
In terms of documentation, I plan on submitting a PR to the rustc dev guide in the near future documenting this and other recent changes to MIR. If there's any other places to update, do let me know
r? `@nagisa`
This adds `nounused` to the set of extern flags:
`--extern nounused:core=/path/to/core/libcore.rlib`.
The effect of this flag is to suppress `unused-crate-dependencies`
warnings relating to the crate.
Remove `--extern-location` and all associated code
`--extern-location` was an experiment to investigate the best way to
generate useful diagnostics for unused dependency warnings by enabling a
build system to identify the corresponding build config.
While I did successfully use this, I've since been convinced the
alternative `--json unused-externs` mechanism is the way to go, and
there's no point in having two mechanisms with basically the same
functionality.
This effectively reverts https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/72603
Create (unstable) 2024 edition
[On Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/Deprecating.20macro.20scoping.20shenanigans/near/272860652), there was a small aside regarding creating the 2024 edition now as opposed to later. There was a reasonable amount of support and no stated opposition.
This change creates the 2024 edition in the compiler and creates a prelude for the 2024 edition. There is no current difference between the 2021 and 2024 editions. Cargo and other tools will need to be updated separately, as it's not in the same repository. This change permits the vast majority of work towards the next edition to proceed _now_ instead of waiting until 2024.
For sanity purposes, I've merged the "hello" UI tests into a single file with multiple revisions. Otherwise we'd end up with a file per edition, despite them being essentially identical.
````@rustbot```` label +T-lang +S-waiting-on-review
Not sure on the relevant team, to be honest.
Stabilize `derive_default_enum`
This stabilizes `#![feature(derive_default_enum)]`, as proposed in [RFC 3107](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3107) and tracked in #87517. In short, it permits you to `#[derive(Default)]` on `enum`s, indicating what the default should be by placing a `#[default]` attribute on the desired variant (which must be a unit variant in the interest of forward compatibility).
```````@rustbot``````` label +S-waiting-on-review +T-lang
`--extern-location` was an experiment to investigate the best way to
generate useful diagnostics for unused dependency warnings by enabling a
build system to identify the corresponding build config.
While I did successfully use this, I've since been convinced the
alternative `--json unused-externs` mechanism is the way to go, and
there's no point in having two mechanisms with basically the same
functionality.
This effectively reverts https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/72603
Loading the fallback bundle in compilation sessions that won't go on to
emit any errors unnecessarily degrades compile time performance, so
lazily create the Fluent bundle when it is first required.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Instead of checking only the user provided sysroot or the default (when
no sysroot is provided), search user provided sysroot and then check
default sysroots for locale requested by the user.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
It was used for deduplicating some errors for legacy code which are mostly deduplicated even without that, but at cost of global mutable state, which is not a good tradeoff.
Add an option for enabling and disabling Fluent's directionality
isolation markers in output. Disabled by default as these can render in
some terminals and applications.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Extend loading of Fluent bundles so that bundles can be loaded from the
sysroot based on the language requested by the user, or using a nightly
flag.
Sysroot bundles are loaded from `$sysroot/share/locale/$locale/*.ftl`.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
This commit updates the signatures of all diagnostic functions to accept
types that can be converted into a `DiagnosticMessage`. This enables
existing diagnostic calls to continue to work as before and Fluent
identifiers to be provided. The `SessionDiagnostic` derive just
generates normal diagnostic calls, so these APIs had to be modified to
accept Fluent identifiers.
In addition, loading of the "fallback" Fluent bundle, which contains the
built-in English messages, has been implemented.
Each diagnostic now has "arguments" which correspond to variables in the
Fluent messages (necessary to render a Fluent message) but no API for
adding arguments has been added yet. Therefore, diagnostics (that do not
require interpolation) can be converted to use Fluent identifiers and
will be output as before.
`MultiSpan` contains labels, which are more complicated with the
introduction of diagnostic translation and will use types from
`rustc_errors` - however, `rustc_errors` depends on `rustc_span` so
`rustc_span` cannot use types like `DiagnosticMessage` without
dependency cycles. Introduce a new `rustc_error_messages` crate that can
contain `DiagnosticMessage` and `MultiSpan`.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Implement -Z oom=panic
This PR removes the `#[rustc_allocator_nounwind]` attribute on `alloc_error_handler` which allows it to unwind with a panic instead of always aborting. This is then used to implement `-Z oom=panic` as per RFC 2116 (tracking issue #43596).
Perf and binary size tests show negligible impact.
There are a few places were we have to construct it, though, and a few
places that are more invasive to change. To do this, we create a
constructor with a long obvious name.
Treat unstable lints as unknown
This change causes unstable lints to be ignored if the `unknown_lints`
lint is allowed. To achieve this, it also changes lints to apply as soon
as they are processed. Previously, lints in the same set were processed
as a batch and then all simultaneously applied.
Implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/469
This also affects the `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns` and
`must_not_suspend` lints as they are not stable. This also changes the
diagnostic level to pull from `unknown_lints` instead of always being
allow or deny.
Add well known values to `--check-cfg` implementation
This pull-request adds well known values for the well known names via `--check-cfg=values()`.
[RFC 3013: Checking conditional compilation at compile time](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3013-conditional-compilation-checking.html#checking-conditional-compilation-at-compile-time) doesn't define this at all, but this seems a nice improvement.
The activation is done by a empty `values()` (new syntax) similar to `names()` except that `names(foo)` also activate well known names while `values(aa, "aa", "kk")` would not.
As stated this use a different activation logic because well known values for the well known names are not always sufficient.
In fact this is problematic for every `target_*` cfg because of non builtin targets, as the current implementation use those built-ins targets to create the list the well known values.
The implementation is straight forward, first we gather (if necessary) all the values (lazily or not) and then we apply them.
r? ```@petrochenkov```
Remove num_cpus dependency from bootstrap, build-manifest and rustc_s…
…ession
`std::threads::available_parallelism` was stabilized in rust 1.59.
r? ```````````````````````````@Mark-Simulacrum```````````````````````````
Implementation of the `expect` attribute (RFC 2383)
This is an implementation of the `expect` attribute as described in [RFC-2383](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html). The attribute allows the suppression of lint message by expecting them. Unfulfilled lint expectations (meaning no expected lint was caught) will emit the `unfulfilled_lint_expectations` lint at the `expect` attribute.
### Example
#### input
```rs
// required feature flag
#![feature(lint_reasons)]
#[expect(unused_mut)] // Will warn about an unfulfilled expectation
#[expect(unused_variables)] // Will be fulfilled by x
fn main() {
let x = 0;
}
```
#### output
```txt
warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
--> $DIR/trigger_lint.rs:3:1
|
LL | #[expect(unused_mut)] // Will warn about an unfulfilled expectation
| ^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default
```
### Implementation
This implementation introduces `Expect` as a new lint level for diagnostics, which have been expected. All lint expectations marked via the `expect` attribute are collected in the [`LintLevelsBuilder`] and assigned an ID that is stored in the new lint level. The `LintLevelsBuilder` stores all found expectations and the data needed to emit the `unfulfilled_lint_expectations` in the [`LintLevelsMap`] which is the result of the [`lint_levels()`] query.
The [`rustc_errors::HandlerInner`] is the central error handler in rustc and handles the emission of all diagnostics. Lint message with the level `Expect` are suppressed during this emission, while the expectation ID is stored in a set which marks them as fulfilled. The last step is then so simply check if all expectations collected by the [`LintLevelsBuilder`] in the [`LintLevelsMap`] have been marked as fulfilled in the [`rustc_errors::HandlerInner`]. Otherwise, a new lint message will be emitted.
The implementation of the `LintExpectationId` required some special handling to make it stable between sessions. Lints can be emitted during [`EarlyLintPass`]es. At this stage, it's not possible to create a stable identifier. The level instead stores an unstable identifier, which is later converted to a stable `LintExpectationId`.
### Followup TO-DOs
All open TO-DOs have been marked with `FIXME` comments in the code. This is the combined list of them:
* [ ] The current implementation doesn't cover cases where the `unfulfilled_lint_expectations` lint is actually expected by another `expect` attribute.
* This should be easily possible, but I wanted to get some feedback before putting more work into this.
* This could also be done in a new PR to not add to much more code to this one
* [ ] Update unstable documentation to reflect this change.
* [ ] Update unstable expectation ids in [`HandlerInner::stashed_diagnostics`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_errors/struct.HandlerInner.html#structfield.stashed_diagnostics)
### Open questions
I also have a few open questions where I would like to get feedback on:
1. The RFC discussion included a suggestion to change the `expect` attribute to something else. (Initiated by `@Ixrec` [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2383#issuecomment-378424091), suggestion from `@scottmcm` to use `#[should_lint(...)]` [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2383#issuecomment-378648877)). No real conclusion was drawn on that point from my understanding. Is this still open for discussion, or was this discarded with the merge of the RFC?
2. How should the expect attribute deal with the new `force-warn` lint level?
---
This approach was inspired by a discussion with `@LeSeulArtichaut.`
RFC tracking issue: #54503
Mentoring/Implementation issue: #85549
[`LintLevelsBuilder`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_lint/levels/struct.LintLevelsBuilder.html
[`LintLevelsMap`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/lint/struct.LintLevelMap.html
[`lint_levels()`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/context/struct.TyCtxt.html#method.lint_levels
[`rustc_errors::HandlerInner`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_errors/struct.HandlerInner.html
[`EarlyLintPass`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_lint/trait.EarlyLintPass.html
