Re-add support for parsing (and pretty-printing) inner-attributes in match body
Re-add support for parsing (and pretty-printing) inner-attributes within body of a `match`.
In other words, we can do `match EXPR { #![inner_attr] ARM_1 ARM_2 ... }` again.
I believe this unbreaks the only four crates that crater flagged as broken by PR #83312.
(I am putting this up so that the lang-team can check it out and decide whether it changes their mind about what to do regarding PR #83312.)
In addition to making the output look nicer for all crates, this also
aligns the pretty-printing output with what the `rental` crate expects.
This will allow us to eventually disable a backwards-compat hack in a
follow-up PR.
In other words, we can do `match EXPR { #![inner_attr] ARM_1 ARM_2 ... }` again.
I believe this unbreaks the only four crates that crater flagged as broken by PR 83312.
(I am putting this up so that the lang-team can check it out and decide whether
it changes their mind about what to do regarding PR 83312.)
Found with https://github.com/est31/warnalyzer.
Dubious changes:
- Is anyone else using rustc_apfloat? I feel weird completely deleting
x87 support.
- Maybe some of the dead code in rustc_data_structures, in case someone
wants to use it in the future?
- Don't change rustc_serialize
I plan to scrap most of the json module in the near future (see
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/418) and fixing the
tests needed more work than I expected.
TODO: check if any of the comments on the deleted code should be kept.
This currently creates a field which is always false on GenericParamDefKind for future use when
consts are permitted to have defaults
Update const_generics:default locations
Previously just ignored them, now actually do something about them.
Fix using type check instead of value
Add parsing
This adds all the necessary changes to lower const-generics defaults from parsing.
Change P<Expr> to AnonConst
This matches the arguments passed to instantiations of const generics, and makes it specific to
just anonymous constants.
Attempt to fix lowering bugs
StructField -> FieldDef ("field definition")
Field -> ExprField ("expression field", not "field expression")
FieldPat -> PatField ("pattern field", not "field pattern")
Also rename visiting and other methods working on them.
ast: Keep expansion status for out-of-line module items
I.e. whether a module `mod foo;` is already loaded from a file or not.
This is a pre-requisite to correctly treating inner attributes on such modules (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81661).
With this change AST structures for `mod` items diverge even more for AST structure for the crate root, which previously used `ast::Mod`.
Therefore this PR removes `ast::Mod` from `ast::Crate` in the first commit, these two things are sufficiently different from each other, at least at syntactic level.
Customization points for visiting a "`mod` item or crate root" were also removed from AST visitors (`fn visit_mod`).
`ast::Mod` itself was refactored away in the second commit in favor of `ItemKind::Mod(Unsafe, ModKind)`.
Ensure valid TraitRefs are created for GATs
This fixes `ProjectionTy::trait_ref` to use the correct substs. Places that need all of the substs have been updated to not use `trait_ref`.
r? ````@jackh726````
Crate root is sufficiently different from `mod` items, at least at syntactic level.
Also remove customization point for "`mod` item or crate root" from AST visitors.
- Adds optional default values to const generic parameters in the AST
and HIR
- Parses these optional default values
- Adds a `const_generics_defaults` feature gate
`PatKind::Ref(PatKind::Ident(BindingMode::ByValue(Mutability::Mut), ..), ..)`
is an AST representing `&(mut ident)`. It was errorneously printed as
`&mut ident` which reparsed into a syntactically different AST.
This affected help diagnostics in the parser.
Make `_` an expression, to discard values in destructuring assignments
This is the third and final step towards implementing destructuring assignment (RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2909, tracking issue: #71126). This PR is the third and final part of #71156, which was split up to allow for easier review.
With this PR, an underscore `_` is parsed as an expression but is allowed *only* on the left-hand side of a destructuring assignment. There it simply discards a value, similarly to the wildcard `_` in patterns. For instance,
```rust
(a, _) = (1, 2)
```
will simply assign 1 to `a` and discard the 2. Note that for consistency,
```
_ = foo
```
is also allowed and equivalent to just `foo`.
Thanks to ````@varkor```` who helped with the implementation, particularly around pre-expansion gating.
r? ````@petrochenkov````
cleanup: Remove `ParseSess::injected_crate_name`
Its only remaining use is in pretty-printing where the necessary information can be easily re-computed.
Fix rustc_ast_pretty print_qpath resulting in invalid macro input
related https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76874 (third case)
### Issue:
The input for a procedural macro is incorrect, for the rust code:
```rust
mod m {
pub trait Tr {
type Ts: super::Tu;
}
}
trait Tu {
fn dummy() { }
}
#[may_proc_macro]
fn foo() {
<T as m::Tr>::Ts::dummy();
}
```
the macro will get the input:
```rust
fn foo() {
<T as m::Tr>::dummy();
}
```
Thus `Ts` has disappeared.
### Fix:
This is due to invalid pretty print of qpath. This PR fix it.
Implement destructuring assignment for structs and slices
This is the second step towards implementing destructuring assignment (RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2909, tracking issue: #71126). This PR is the second part of #71156, which was split up to allow for easier review.
Note that the first PR (#78748) is not merged yet, so it is included as the first commit in this one. I thought this would allow the review to start earlier because I have some time this weekend to respond to reviews. If ``@petrochenkov`` prefers to wait until the first PR is merged, I totally understand, of course.
This PR implements destructuring assignment for (tuple) structs and slices. In order to do this, the following *parser change* was necessary: struct expressions are not required to have a base expression, i.e. `Struct { a: 1, .. }` becomes legal (in order to act like a struct pattern).
Unfortunately, this PR slightly regresses the diagnostics implemented in #77283. However, it is only a missing help message in `src/test/ui/issues/issue-77218.rs`. Other instances of this diagnostic are not affected. Since I don't exactly understand how this help message works and how to fix it yet, I was hoping it's OK to regress this temporarily and fix it in a follow-up PR.
Thanks to ``@varkor`` who helped with the implementation, particularly around the struct rest changes.
r? ``@petrochenkov``
