This commit adds a new nonterminal `expr_2021` in macro patterns, and
`expr_fragment_specifier_2024` feature flag. For now, `expr` and
`expr_2021` are treated the same, but in future PRs we will update
`expr` to match to new grammar.
Co-authored-by: Vincezo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
It is impossible for expr here to be a braced macro call. Expr comes
from `parse_stmt_without_recovery`, in which macro calls are parsed by
`parse_stmt_mac`. See this part:
let kind = if (style == MacStmtStyle::Braces
&& self.token != token::Dot
&& self.token != token::Question)
|| self.token == token::Semi
|| self.token == token::Eof
{
StmtKind::MacCall(P(MacCallStmt { mac, style, attrs, tokens: None }))
} else {
// Since none of the above applied, this is an expression statement macro.
let e = self.mk_expr(lo.to(hi), ExprKind::MacCall(mac));
let e = self.maybe_recover_from_bad_qpath(e)?;
let e = self.parse_expr_dot_or_call_with(e, lo, attrs)?;
let e = self.parse_expr_assoc_with(
0,
LhsExpr::AlreadyParsed { expr: e, starts_statement: false },
)?;
StmtKind::Expr(e)
};
A braced macro call at the head of a statement is always either extended
into ExprKind::Field / MethodCall / Await / Try / Binary, or else
returned as StmtKind::MacCall. We can never get a StmtKind::Expr
containing ExprKind::MacCall containing brace delimiter.
The change to the test is a little goofy because the compiler was
guessing "correctly" before that `falsy! {}` is the condition as opposed
to the else body. But I believe this change is fundamentally correct.
Braced macro invocations in statement position are most often item-like
(`thread_local! {...}`) as opposed to parenthesized macro invocations
which are condition-like (`cfg!(...)`).
This commit by itself is supposed to have no effect on behavior. All of
the call sites are updated to preserve their previous behavior.
The behavior changes are in the commits that follow.
For each of these, we need to decide whether they need to be using
`expr_requires_semi_to_be_stmt`, or `expr_requires_comma_to_be_match_arm`,
which are supposed to be 2 different behaviors. Previously they were
conflated into one, causing either too much or too little
parenthesization.
Make sure we consume a generic arg when checking mistyped turbofish
When recovering un-turbofish-ed args in expr position (e.g. `let x = a<T, U>();` in `check_mistyped_turbofish_with_multiple_type_params`, we used `parse_seq_to_before_end` to parse the fake generic args; however, it used `parse_generic_arg` which *optionally* parses a generic arg. If it doesn't end up parsing an arg, it returns `Ok(None)` and consumes no tokens. If we don't find a delimiter after this (`,`), we try parsing *another* element. In this case, we just infinitely loop looking for a subsequent element.
We can fix this by making sure that we either parse a generic arg or error in `parse_seq_to_before_end`'s callback.
Fixes#124897
ignore generics args in attribute paths
Fixes#97006Fixes#123911Fixes#123912
This patch ensures that we no longer have to handle invalid generic arguments in attribute paths.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Fix parse error message for meta items
Addresses https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/122796#issuecomment-2010803906, cc [``@]Thomasdezeeuw.``
For attrs inside of a macro like `#[doc(alias = $ident)]` or `#[cfg(feature = $ident)]` where `$ident` is a macro metavariable of fragment kind `ident`, we used to say the following when expanded (with `$ident` ⟼ `ident`):
```
error: expected unsuffixed literal or identifier, found `ident`
--> weird.rs:6:19
|
6 | #[cfg(feature = $ident)]
| ^^^^^^
...
11 | m!(id);
| ------ in this macro invocation
|
= note: this error originates in the macro `m` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
```
This was incorrect and caused confusion, justifiably so (see #122796).
In this position, we only accept/expect *unsuffixed literals* which consist of numeric & string literals as well as the boolean literals / the keywords / the reserved identifiers `false` & `true` **but not** arbitrary identifiers.
Furthermore, we used to suggest garbage when encountering unexpected non-identifier tokens:
```
error: expected unsuffixed literal, found `-`
--> weird.rs:16:17
|
16 | #[cfg(feature = -1)]
| ^
|
help: surround the identifier with quotation marks to parse it as a string
|
16 | #[cfg(feature =" "-1)]
| + +
```
Now we no longer do.
The starting point for this was identical comments on two different
fields, in `ast::VariantData::Struct` and `hir::VariantData::Struct`:
```
// FIXME: investigate making this a `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>`
recovered: bool
```
I tried that, and then found that I needed to add an `ErrorGuaranteed`
to `Recovered::Yes`. Then I ended up using `Recovered` instead of
`Option<ErrorGuaranteed>` for these two places and elsewhere, which
required moving `ErrorGuaranteed` from `rustc_parse` to `rustc_ast`.
This makes things more consistent, because `Recovered` is used in more
places, and there are fewer uses of `bool` and
`Option<ErrorGuaranteed>`. And safer, because it's difficult/impossible
to set `recovered` to `Recovered::Yes` without having emitted an error.
Remove braces when fixing a nested use tree into a single item
[Back in 2019](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/56645) I added rustfix support for the `unused_imports` lint, to automatically remove them when running `cargo fix`. For the most part this worked great, but when removing all but one childs of a nested use tree it turned `use foo::{Unused, Used}` into `use foo::{Used}`. This is slightly annoying, because it then requires you to run `rustfmt` to get `use foo::Used`.
This PR automatically removes braces and the surrouding whitespace when all but one child of a nested use tree are unused. To get it done I had to add the span of the nested use tree to the AST, and refactor a bit the code I wrote back then.
A thing I noticed is, there doesn't seem to be any `//@ run-rustfix` test for fixing the `unused_imports` lint. I created a test in `tests/suggestions` (is that the right directory?) that for now tests just what I added in the PR. I can followup in a separate PR to add more tests for fixing `unused_lints`.
This PR is best reviewed commit-by-commit.
Improve `rustc_parse::Parser`'s debuggability
The main event is the final commit where I add `Parser::debug_lookahead`. Everything else was basically cleaning up things that bugged me (debugging, as it were) until I felt comfortable enough to actually work on it.
The motivation is that it's annoying as hell to try to figure out how the debug infra works in rustc without having basic queries like `debug!(?parser);` come up "empty". However, Parser has a lot of fields that are mostly irrelevant for most debugging, like the entire ParseSess. I think `Parser::debug_lookahead` with a capped lookahead might be fine as a general-purpose Debug impl, but this adapter version was suggested to allow more choice, and admittedly, it's a refined version of what I was already handrolling just to get some insight going.
I tried debugging a parser-related issue but found it annoying to not be
able to easily peek into the Parser's token stream.
Add a convenience fn that offers an opinionated view into the parser,
but one that is useful for answering basic questions about parser state.
There are some test cases involving `parse` and `tokenstream` and
`mut_visit` that are located in `rustc_expand`. Because it used to be
the case that constructing a `ParseSess` required the involvement of
`rustc_expand`. However, since #64197 merged (a long time ago)
`rust_expand` no longer needs to be involved.
This commit moves the tests into `rustc_parse`. This is the optimal
place for the `parse` tests. It's not ideal for the `tokenstream` and
`mut_visit` tests -- they would be better in `rustc_ast` -- but they
still rely on parsing, which is not available in `rustc_ast`. But
`rustc_parse` is lower down in the crate graph and closer to `rustc_ast`
than `rust_expand`, so it's still an improvement for them.
The exact renaming is as follows:
- rustc_expand/src/mut_visit/tests.rs -> rustc_parse/src/parser/mut_visit/tests.rs
- rustc_expand/src/tokenstream/tests.rs -> rustc_parse/src/parser/tokenstream/tests.rs
- rustc_expand/src/tests.rs + rustc_expand/src/parse/tests.rs ->
compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/tests.rs
The latter two test files are combined because there's no need for them
to be separate, and having a `rustc_parse::parser::parse` module would
be weird. This also means some `pub(crate)`s can be removed.
Stabilise inline_const
# Stabilisation Report
## Summary
This PR will stabilise `inline_const` feature in expression position. `inline_const_pat` is still unstable and will *not* be stabilised.
The feature will allow code like this:
```rust
foo(const { 1 + 1 })
```
which is roughly desugared into
```rust
struct Foo;
impl Foo {
const FOO: i32 = 1 + 1;
}
foo(Foo::FOO)
```
This feature is from https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2920 and is tracked in #76001 (the tracking issue should *not* be closed as it needs to track inline const in pattern position). The initial implementation is done in #77124.
## Difference from RFC
There are two major differences (enhancements) as implemented from the RFC. First thing is that the RFC says that the type of an inline const block inferred from the content *within* it, but we currently can infer the type using the information from outside the const block as well. This is a frequently requested feature to the initial implementation (e.g. #89964). The inference is implemented in #89561 and is done by treating inline const similar to a closure and therefore share inference context with its parent body.
This allows code like:
```rust
let v: Vec<i32> = const { Vec::new() };
```
Another enhancement that differs from the RFC is that we currently allow inline consts to reference generic parameters. This is implemented in #96557.
This allows code like:
```rust
fn create_none_array<T, const N: usize>() -> [Option<T>; N] {
[const { None::<T> }; N]
}
```
This enhancement also makes inline const usable as static asserts:
```rust
fn require_zst<T>() {
const { assert!(std::mem::size_of::<T>() == 0) }
}
```
## Documentation
Reference: rust-lang/reference#1295
## Unresolved issues
We still have a few issues that are not resolved, but I don't think it necessarily has to block stabilisation:
* expr fragment specifier issue: #86730
* ~~`const {}` behaves similar to `async {}` but not to `{}` and `unsafe {}` (they are treated as `ExpressionWithoutBlock` rather than `ExpressionWithBlock`): https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/const.20blocks.20differ.20from.20normal.20and.20from.20unsafe.20blocks/near/290229453~~
## Tests
There are a few tests in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/master/src/test/ui/inline-const
delegation: Support renaming, and async, const, extern "ABI" and C-variadic functions
Also allow delegating to functions with opaque types (`impl Trait`).
The delegation item will refer to the original opaque type from the callee, fresh opaque type won't be created, which seems like a reasonable behavior.
(Such delegation items will cause query cycles when used in trait impls, but it can be fixed later.)
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/118212.
Rollup of 3 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #124003 (Dellvmize some intrinsics (use `u32` instead of `Self` in some integer intrinsics))
- #124169 (Don't fatal when calling `expect_one_of` when recovering arg in `parse_seq`)
- #124286 (Subtree sync for rustc_codegen_cranelift)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Don't fatal when calling `expect_one_of` when recovering arg in `parse_seq`
In `parse_seq`, when parsing a sequence of token-separated items, if we don't see a separator, we try to parse another item eagerly in order to give a good diagnostic and recover from a missing separator:
d1a0fa5ed3/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/mod.rs (L900-L901)
If parsing the item itself calls `expect_one_of`, then we will fatal because of #58903:
d1a0fa5ed3/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/mod.rs (L513-L516)
For `precise_capturing` feature I implemented, we do end up calling `expected_one_of`:
d1a0fa5ed3/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/ty.rs (L712-L714)
This leads the compiler to fatal *before* having emitted the first error, leading to absolutely no useful information for the user about what happened in the parser.
This PR makes it so that we stop doing that.
Fixes#124195
Disallow ambiguous attributes on expressions
This implements the suggestion in [#15701](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15701#issuecomment-2033124217) to disallow ambiguous outer attributes on expressions. This should resolve one of the concerns blocking the stabilization of `stmt_expr_attributes`.
The current message for "`->` used for field access" is the following:
```rust
error: expected one of `!`, `.`, `::`, `;`, `?`, `{`, `}`, or an operator, found `->`
--> src/main.rs:2:6
|
2 | a->b;
| ^^ expected one of 8 possible tokens
```
(playground link[1])
This PR tries to address this by adding a dedicated error message and recovery. The proposed error message is:
```
error: `->` used for field access or method call
--> ./tiny_test.rs:2:6
|
2 | a->b;
| ^^ help: try using `.` instead
|
= help: the `.` operator will dereference the value if needed
```
(feel free to bikeshed it as much as necessary)
[1]: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=7f8b6f4433aa7866124123575456f54e
Signed-off-by: Sasha Pourcelot <sasha.pourcelot@protonmail.com>
Properly handle emojis as literal prefix in macros
Do not accept the following
```rust
macro_rules! lexes {($($_:tt)*) => {}}
lexes!(🐛"foo");
```
Before, invalid emoji identifiers were gated during parsing instead of lexing in all cases, but this didn't account for macro pre-expansion of literal prefixes.
Fix#123696.
Implement syntax for `impl Trait` to specify its captures explicitly (`feature(precise_capturing)`)
Implements `impl use<'a, 'b, T, U> Sized` syntax that allows users to explicitly list the captured parameters for an opaque, rather than inferring it from the opaque's bounds (or capturing *all* lifetimes under 2024-edition capture rules). This allows us to exclude some implicit captures, so this syntax may be used as a migration strategy for changes due to #117587.
We represent this list of captured params as `PreciseCapturingArg` in AST and HIR, resolving them between `rustc_resolve` and `resolve_bound_vars`. Later on, we validate that the opaques only capture the parameters in this list.
We artificially limit the feature to *require* mentioning all type and const parameters, since we don't currently have support for non-lifetime bivariant generics. This can be relaxed in the future.
We also may need to limit this to require naming *all* lifetime parameters for RPITIT, since GATs have no variance. I have to investigate this. This can also be relaxed in the future.
r? `@oli-obk`
Tracking issue:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123432
Cleanup: Rename `ModSep` to `PathSep`
`::` is usually referred to as the *path separator* (citation needed).
The existing name `ModSep` for *module separator* is a bit misleading since it in fact separates the segments of arbitrary path segments, not only ones resolving to modules. Let me just give a shout-out to associated items (`T::Assoc`, `<Ty as Trait>::function`) and enum variants (`Option::None`).
Motivation: Reduce friction for new contributors, prevent potential confusion.
cc `@petrochenkov`
r? nnethercote or compiler
