Account for `impl Trait {` when `impl Trait for Type {` was intended
On editions where bare traits are never allowed, detect if the user has written `impl Trait` with no type, silence any dyn-compatibility errors, and provide a structured suggestion for the potentially missing type:
```
error[E0782]: trait objects must include the `dyn` keyword
--> $DIR/missing-for-type-in-impl.rs:8:6
|
LL | impl Foo<i64> {
| ^^^^^^^^
|
help: add `dyn` keyword before this trait
|
LL | impl dyn Foo<i64> {
| +++
help: you might have intended to implement this trait for a given type
|
LL | impl Foo<i64> for /* Type */ {
| ++++++++++++++
```
CC #131051.
Fix needless_lifetimes in stable_mir
Hi,
This PR fixes the following clippy warning in stable_mir
```
warning: the following explicit lifetimes could be elided: 'a
--> compiler/stable_mir/src/mir/visit.rs:79:30
|
79 | fn visit_projection_elem<'a>(
| ^^
80 | &mut self,
81 | place_ref: PlaceRef<'a>,
| ^^
|
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#needless_lifetimes
= note: `#[warn(clippy::needless_lifetimes)]` on by default
help: elide the lifetimes
|
79 ~ fn visit_projection_elem(
80 | &mut self,
81 ~ place_ref: PlaceRef<'_>,
|
```
Best regards,
Michal
Add support for reborrowing pinned method receivers
This builds on #130526 to add pinned reborrowing for method receivers. This enables the folllowing examples to work:
```rust
#![feature(pin_ergonomics)]
#![allow(incomplete_features)]
use std::pin::Pin;
pub struct Foo;
impl Foo {
fn foo(self: Pin<&mut Self>) {
}
fn baz(self: Pin<&Self>) {
}
}
pub fn bar(x: Pin<&mut Foo>) {
x.foo();
x.foo();
x.baz(); // Pin<&mut Foo> is downgraded to Pin<&Foo>
}
pub fn baaz(x: Pin<&Foo>) {
x.baz();
x.baz();
}
```
This PR includes the original one, which is currently in the commit queue, but the only code changes are in the latest commit (d3c53aaa5c6fcb1018c58d229bc5d92202fa6880).
#130494
r? `@compiler-errors`
Check elaborated projections from dyn don't mention unconstrained late bound lifetimes
Check that the projections that are *not* explicitly written but which we deduce from elaborating the principal of a `dyn` *also* do not reference unconstrained late-bound lifetimes, just like the ones that the user writes by hand.
That is to say, given:
```
trait Foo<T>: Bar<Assoc = T> {}
trait Bar {
type Assoc;
}
```
The type `dyn for<'a> Foo<&'a T>` (basically) elaborates to `dyn for<'a> Foo<&'a T> + for<'a> Bar<Assoc = &'a T>`[^1]. However, the `Bar` projection predicate is not well-formed, since `'a` must show up in the trait's arguments to be referenced in the term of a projection. We must error in this situation[^well], or else `dyn for<'a> Foo<&'a T>` is unsound.
We already detect this for user-written projections during HIR->rustc_middle conversion, so this largely replicates that logic using the helper functions that were already conveniently defined.
---
I'm cratering this first to see the fallout; if it's minimal or zero, then let's land it as-is. If not, the way that this is implemented is very conducive to an FCW.
---
Fixes#130347
[^1]: We don't actually elaborate it like that in rustc; we only keep the principal trait ref `Foo<&'a T>` and the projection part of `Bar<Assoc = ...>`, but it's useful to be a bit verbose here for the purpose of explaining the issue.
[^well]: Well, we could also make `dyn for<'a> Foo<&'a T>` *not* implement `for<'a> Bar<Assoc = &'a T>`, but this is inconsistent with the case where the user writes `Assoc = ...` in the type itself, and it overly complicates the implementation of trait objects' built-in impls.
Update cargo
17 commits in 80d82ca22abbee5fb7b51fa1abeb1ae34e99e88a..ad074abe3a18ce8444c06f962ceecfd056acfc73
2024-09-27 17:56:01 +0000 to 2024-10-04 18:18:15 +0000
- test: Remove the last of our custom json assertions (rust-lang/cargo#14576)
- docs(ref): Expand on MSRV (rust-lang/cargo#14636)
- docs: Minor re-grouping of pages (rust-lang/cargo#14620)
- docs(ref): Highleft whats left for msrv-policy (rust-lang/cargo#14638)
- Fix `cargo:version_number` - has only one `:` (rust-lang/cargo#14637)
- docs: Declare support level for each crate in our Charter / docs (rust-lang/cargo#14600)
- chore(deps): update tar to 0.4.42 (rust-lang/cargo#14632)
- docs(charter): Declare new Intentional Artifacts as 'small' changes (rust-lang/cargo#14599)
- fix: Remove implicit feature removal (rust-lang/cargo#14630)
- docs(config): make `--config <PATH>` more prominent (rust-lang/cargo#14631)
- chore(deps): update rust crate unicode-width to 0.2.0 (rust-lang/cargo#14624)
- chore(deps): update embarkstudios/cargo-deny-action action to v2 (rust-lang/cargo#14628)
- docs(ref): Clean up language for `package.rust-version` (rust-lang/cargo#14619)
- docs: clarify `target.'cfg(...)'` doesnt respect cfg from build script (rust-lang/cargo#14312)
- test: relax compiler panic assertions (rust-lang/cargo#14618)
- refactor(compiler): zero-copy deserialization when possible (rust-lang/cargo#14608)
- test: add support for features in the sat resolver (rust-lang/cargo#14583)
On editions where bare traits are never allowed, detect if the user has
written `impl Trait` with no type, silence any dyn-compatibility errors,
and provide a structured suggestion for the potentially missing type:
```
error[E0782]: trait objects must include the `dyn` keyword
--> $DIR/missing-for-type-in-impl.rs:8:6
|
LL | impl Foo<i64> {
| ^^^^^^^^
|
help: add `dyn` keyword before this trait
|
LL | impl dyn Foo<i64> {
| +++
help: you might have intended to implement this trait for a given type
|
LL | impl Foo<i64> for /* Type */ {
| ++++++++++++++
```
Fix `target_abi` in `sparc-unknown-none-elf`
This was previously set to `target_abi = "elf"`, but `elf` is not used elsewhere as a target ABI (even though there's many targets that have it in their name), so I've removed it.
CC target maintainer ``@jonathanpallant,`` what do you think about this?
``@rustbot`` label O-SPARC
Fix `target_env` in `avr-unknown-gnu-atmega328`
The target name itself contains GNU, we should probably reflect that as `target_env = "gnu"` as well? Or from my reading of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74941#issuecomment-712219034, perhaps not, but then that should probably be documented somewhere?
There's no listed target maintainer, but the target was introduced in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74941, so I'll ping the author of that: `@dylanmckay`
Relatedly, I wonder _why_ the recommendation is to [create separate target triples for each AVR](https://github.com/Rahix/avr-hal/tree/main/avr-specs), when `-Ctarget-cpu=...` would suffice, perhaps you could also elaborate on that? Was it just because `-Ctarget-cpu=...` didn't exist back then? If so, now that it does, should we now change the target back to e.g. `avr-unknown-none-gnu`, and require the user to set `-Ctarget-cpu=...` instead?
Increase Stack Size for AIX
On AIX, there are limited support for tail call optimizations, so we need to set a larger stack size value.
Fixes the following tests on AIX:
```
[ui] tests/ui/associated-consts/issue-93775.rs
[ui] tests/ui/closures/deeply-nested_closures.rs
[ui] tests/ui/issues/issue-74564-if-expr-stack-overflow.rs
[ui] tests/ui/parser/survive-peano-lesson-queue.rs
```
Stabilize the `map`/`value` methods on `ControlFlow`
And fix the stability attribute on the `pub use` in `core::ops`.
libs-api in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/75744#issuecomment-2231214910 seemed reasonably happy with naming for these, so let's try for an FCP.
Summary:
```rust
impl<B, C> ControlFlow<B, C> {
pub fn break_value(self) -> Option<B>;
pub fn map_break<T>(self, f: impl FnOnce(B) -> T) -> ControlFlow<T, C>;
pub fn continue_value(self) -> Option<C>;
pub fn map_continue<T>(self, f: impl FnOnce(C) -> T) -> ControlFlow<B, T>;
}
```
Resolves#75744
``@rustbot`` label +needs-fcp +t-libs-api -t-libs
---
Aside, in case it keeps someone else from going down the same dead end: I looked at the `{break,continue}_value` methods and tried to make them `const` as part of this, but that's disallowed because of not having `const Drop`, so put it back to not even unstably-const.
Add x86_64-unknown-trusty as tier 3 target
This PR adds a third target for the Trusty platform, `x86_64-unknown-trusty`.
Please let me know if an MCP is required. https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/582 was made when adding the first two targets, I can make another one for the new target as well if needed.
# Target Tier Policy Acknowledgements
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
- Nicole LeGare (```@randomPoison)```
- Andrei Homescu (```@ahomescu)```
- Chris Wailes (chriswailes@google.com)
- As a fallback trusty-dev-team@google.com can be contacted
Note that this does not reflect the maintainers currently listed in [`trusty.md`](c52c23b6f4/src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/trusty.md). #130452 is currently open to update the list of maintainers in the documentation.
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
The new target `x86_64-unknown-trusty` follows the existing naming convention for similar targets.
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
👍
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users.
There are no known legal issues or license incompatibilities.
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions.
👍
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions.
This PR only adds the target. `std` support is being worked on and will be added in a future PR.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
👍
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular, do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via ```@)``` to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
👍
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target.
👍
> Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork of the backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
👍
This was previously set to `target_abi = "elf"`, but `elf` is not used
elsewhere as a target ABI (even though there's many targets that have it
in their name).
Enable `--no-sandbox` option by default for rustdoc GUI tests
It's apparently common enough for people to have issues with the `sandbox` mode in chromium, so better disable it by default.
r? `@notriddle`
Implement RFC3695 Allow boolean literals as cfg predicates
This PR implements https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695: allow boolean literals as cfg predicates, i.e. `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)`.
r? `@nnethercote` *(or anyone with parser knowledge)*
cc `@clubby789`
remove blank issue template
r? `@Noratrieb`
So there are currently two blank issue templates. One called "Blank Issue" and one called "Blank issue". Wildly different, of course. It seems that one is auto generated by GitHub, while the other one has an explicit template for it. This removes the explicit one so there's only one "Blank [iI]ssue" in the list. Unfortunately, the only way to test if it works is merging this and finding out, but it seems obvious that it would work.
