Clean up some comments near `use` declarations
#125443 will reformat all `use` declarations in the repository. There are a few edge cases involving comments on `use` declarations that require care. This PR cleans up some clumsy comment cases, taking us a step closer to #125443 being able to merge.
r? ``@lqd``
Stabilise `c_unwind`
Fix#74990Fix#115285 (that's also where FCP is happening)
Marking as draft PR for now due to `compiler_builtins` issues
r? `@Amanieu`
Trying to address an incremental compilation issues
This pull request contains two independent changes, one makes it so when `try_force_from_dep_node` fails to recover a query - it marks the node as "red" instead of "green" and the second one makes Debug impl for `DepNode` less panicky if it encounters something from the previous compilation that doesn't map to anything in the current one.
I'm not 100% confident that this is the correct approach, but so far I managed to find a bunch of comments suggesting that some things are allowed to fail in a certain way and changes I made are allowing for those things to fail this way and it fixes all the small reproducers I managed to find.
Compilation panic this pull request avoids is caused by an automatically generated code on an associated type and it is not happening if something else marks it as outdated first (or close like that, but scenario is quite obscure).
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/107226
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/125367
Most modules have such a blank line, but some don't. Inserting the blank
line makes it clearer that the `//!` comments are describing the entire
module, rather than the `use` declaration(s) that immediately follows.
This makes their intent and expected location clearer. We see some
examples where these comments were not clearly separate from `use`
declarations, which made it hard to understand what the comment is
describing.
Apparently MIR borrowck cares about at least one of these for checking variance.
In runtime MIR, though, there's no need for them as `PtrToPtr` does the same thing.
(Banning them simplifies passes like GVN that no longer need to handle multiple cast possibilities.)
local_def_path_hash_to_def_id is used by Debug impl for DepNode and it
looks for DefPathHash inside the current compilation. During incremental
compilation we are going through nodes that belong to a previous
compilation and might not be present and a simple attempt to print such
node with tracing::debug (try_mark_parent_green does it for example)
results in a otherwise avoidable panic
Panic was added in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/82183,
specifically in 2b60338ee9, with a comment "We only use this mapping for
cases where we know that it must succeed.", but I'm not sure if this
property holds when we traverse nodes from the old compilation in order
to figure out if they are valid or not
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #125447 (Allow constraining opaque types during subtyping in the trait system)
- #125766 (MCDC Coverage: instrument last boolean RHS operands from condition coverage)
- #125880 (Remove `src/tools/rust-demangler`)
- #126154 (StorageLive: refresh storage (instead of UB) when local is already live)
- #126572 (override user defined channel when using precompiled rustc)
- #126662 (Unconditionally warn on usage of `wasm32-wasi`)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Make pretty printing for `f16` and `f128` consistent
Currently the docs show e.g.
{transmute(0xfffeffffffffffffffffffffffffffff): f128}
for f128 constants. This should fix that to instead use apfloat for printing, as is done for `f32` and `f64`.
Currently the docs show e.g.
{transmute(0xfffeffffffffffffffffffffffffffff): f128}
for f128 constants. This should fix that to instead use apfloat for
printing, as is done for `f32` and `f64`.
Uplift next trait solver to `rustc_next_trait_solver`
🎉
There's so many FIXMEs! Sorry! Ideally this merges with the FIXMEs and we track and squash them over the near future.
Also, this still doesn't build on anything other than rustc. I still need to fix `feature = "nightly"` in `rustc_type_ir`, and remove and fix all the nightly feature usage in the new trait solver (notably: let-chains).
Also, sorry `@lcnr` I know you asked for me to separate the commit where we `mv rustc_trait_selection/solve/... rustc_next_trait_solver/solve/...`, but I had already done all the work by that point. Luckily, `git` understands the file moves so it should still be relatively reviewable.
If this is still very difficult to review, then I can do some rebasing magic to try to separate this out. Please let me know!
r? lcnr
Replace all `&DiagCtxt` with a `DiagCtxtHandle<'_>` wrapper type
r? `@davidtwco`
This paves the way for tracking more state (e.g. error tainting) in the diagnostic context handle
Basically I will add a field to the `DiagCtxtHandle` that refers back to the `InferCtxt`'s (and others) `Option<ErrorHandled>`, allowing us to immediately taint these contexts when emitting an error and not needing manual tainting anymore (which is easy to forget and we don't do in general anyway)
Rename `InstanceDef` -> `InstanceKind`
Renames `InstanceDef` to `InstanceKind`. The `Def` here is confusing, and makes it hard to distinguish `Instance` and `InstanceDef`. `InstanceKind` makes this more obvious, since it's really just describing what *kind* of instance we have.
Not sure if this is large enough to warrant a types team MCP -- it's only 53 files. I don't personally think it does, but happy to write one if anyone disagrees. cc ``@rust-lang/types``
r? types
Only compute vtable information during codegen
This PR removes vtable information from the `Object` and `TraitUpcasting` candidate sources in the trait solvers, and defers the computation of relevant information to `Instance::resolve`. This is because vtables really aren't a thing in the trait world -- they're an implementation detail in codegen.
Previously it was just easiest to tangle this information together since we were already doing the work of looking at all the supertraits in the trait solver, and specifically because we use traits to represent when it's possible to call a method via a vtable (`Object` candidate) and do upcasting (`Unsize` candidate). but I am somewhat suspicious we're doing a *lot* of extra work, especially in polymorphic contexts, so let's see what perf says.
smir: merge identical Constant and ConstOperand types
The first commit renames the const operand visitor functions on regular MIR to match the type name, that was forgotten in the original rename.
The second commit changes stable MIR, fixing https://github.com/rust-lang/project-stable-mir/issues/71. Previously there were two different smir types for the MIR type `ConstOperand`, one used in `Operand` and one in `VarDebugInfoContents`.
Maybe we should have done this with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125967, so there's only a single breaking change... but I saw that PR too late.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/project-stable-mir/issues/71
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #125829 (rustc_span: Add conveniences for working with span formats)
- #126361 (Unify intrinsics body handling in StableMIR)
- #126417 (Add `f16` and `f128` inline ASM support for `x86` and `x86-64`)
- #126424 ( Also sort `crt-static` in `--print target-features` output)
- #126428 (Polish `std::path::absolute` documentation.)
- #126429 (Add `f16` and `f128` const eval for binary and unary operationations)
- #126448 (End support for Python 3.8 in tidy)
- #126488 (Use `std::path::absolute` in bootstrap)
- #126511 (.mailmap: Associate both my work and my private email with me)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Add `f16` and `f128` const eval for binary and unary operationations
Add const evaluation and Miri support for f16 and f128, including unary and binary operations. Casts are not yet included.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/124583
r? ``@RalfJung``
Use `Variance` glob imported variants everywhere
Fully commit to using the globbed variance. Could be convinced the other way, and change this PR to not use the globbed variants anywhere, but I'd rather we do one or the other.
r? lcnr
change method resolution to constrain hidden types instead of rejecting method candidates
Some of these are in probes and may affect inference. This is therefore a breaking change.
This allows new code to compile on stable:
```rust
trait Trait {}
impl Trait for u32 {}
struct Bar<T>(T);
impl Bar<u32> {
fn foo(self) {}
}
fn foo(x: bool) -> Bar<impl Sized> {
if x {
let x = foo(false);
x.foo();
//^ this used to not find the `foo` method, because while we did equate `x`'s type with possible candidates, we didn't allow opaque type inference while doing so
}
todo!()
}
```
r? ```````@compiler-errors```````
fixes #121404
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116652
