This is the only trait specializable outside of the standard library.
Before stabilizing specialization we will probably want to remove
support for this. It was originally made specializable to allow a more
efficient ToString in libproc_macro back when this way the only way to
get any data out of a TokenStream. We now support getting individual
tokens, so proc macros no longer need to call it as often.
Add `size_of` and `size_of_val` and `align_of` and `align_of_val` to the prelude
(Note: need to update the PR to add `align_of` and `align_of_val`, and remove the second commit with the myriad changes to appease the lint.)
Many, many projects use `size_of` to get the size of a type. However,
it's also often equally easy to hardcode a size (e.g. `8` instead of
`size_of::<u64>()`). Minimizing friction in the use of `size_of` helps
ensure that people use it and make code more self-documenting.
The name `size_of` is unambiguous: the name alone, without any prefix or
path, is self-explanatory and unmistakeable for any other functionality.
Adding it to the prelude cannot produce any name conflicts, as any local
definition will silently shadow the one from the prelude. Thus, we don't
need to wait for a new edition prelude to add it.
Many, many projects use `size_of` to get the size of a type. However,
it's also often equally easy to hardcode a size (e.g. `8` instead of
`size_of::<u64>()`). Minimizing friction in the use of `size_of` helps
ensure that people use it and make code more self-documenting.
The name `size_of` is unambiguous: the name alone, without any prefix or
path, is self-explanatory and unmistakeable for any other functionality.
Adding it to the prelude cannot produce any name conflicts, as any local
definition will silently shadow the one from the prelude. Thus, we don't
need to wait for a new edition prelude to add it.
Add `size_of_val`, `align_of`, and `align_of_val` as well, with similar
justification: widely useful, self-explanatory, unmistakeable for
anything else, won't produce conflicts.
This just moves the server-relevant parts of handles into `server.rs`.
It introduces a new higher-order macro `with_api_handle_types` to avoid
some duplication.
This fixes two `FIXME` comments, and makes things clearer, by not having
server code in `client.rs`.
Help with common API confusion, like asking for `push` when the data structure really has `append`.
```
error[E0599]: no method named `size` found for struct `Vec<{integer}>` in the current scope
--> $DIR/rustc_confusables_std_cases.rs:17:7
|
LL | x.size();
| ^^^^
|
help: you might have meant to use `len`
|
LL | x.len();
| ~~~
help: there is a method with a similar name
|
LL | x.resize();
| ~~~~~~
```
#59450
Rename MaybeUninit::write_slice
A step to push #79995 forward.
https://github.com/rust-lang/libs-team/issues/122 also suggested to make them inherent methods, but they can't be — they'd conflict with slice's regular methods.
This mostly works well, and eliminates a couple of delayed bugs.
One annoying thing is that we should really also add an
`ErrorGuaranteed` to `proc_macro::bridge::LitKind::Err`. But that's
difficult because `proc_macro` doesn't have access to `ErrorGuaranteed`,
so we have to fake it.
Added byte position range for `proc_macro::Span`
Currently, the [`Debug`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/proc_macro/struct.Span.html#impl-Debug-for-Span) implementation for [`proc_macro::Span`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/proc_macro/struct.Span.html#) calls the debug function implemented in the trait implementation of `server::Span` for the type `Rustc` in the `rustc-expand` crate.
The current implementation, of the referenced function, looks something like this:
```rust
fn debug(&mut self, span: Self::Span) -> String {
if self.ecx.ecfg.span_debug {
format!("{:?}", span)
} else {
format!("{:?} bytes({}..{})", span.ctxt(), span.lo().0, span.hi().0)
}
}
```
It returns the byte position of the [`Span`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/proc_macro/struct.Span.html#) as an interpolated string.
Because this is currently the only way to get a spans position in the file, I might lead someone, who is interested in this information, to parsing this interpolated string back into a range of bytes, which I think is a very non-rusty way.
The proposed `position()`, method implemented in this PR, gives the ability to directly get this info.
It returns a [`std::ops::Range`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/ops/struct.Range.html#) wrapping the lowest and highest byte of the [`Span`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/proc_macro/struct.Span.html#).
I put it behind the `proc_macro_span` feature flag because many of the other functions that have a similar footprint also are annotated with it, I don't actually know if this is right.
It would be great if somebody could take a look at this, thank you very much in advanced.
While working on some other changes in the bridge, I noticed that when
running a nested proc-macro (which is currently only possible using
the unstable `TokenStream::expand_expr`), any symbols held by the
proc-macro client would be invalidated, as the same thread would be used
for the nested macro by default, and the interner doesn't handle nested
use.
After discussing with @eddyb, we decided the best approach might be to
force the use of the cross-thread executor for nested invocations, as it
will never re-use thread-local storage, avoiding the issue. This
shouldn't impact performance, as expand_expr is still unstable, and
infrequently used.
This was chosen rather than making the client symbol interner handle
nested invocations, as that would require replacing the internal
interner `Vec` with a `BTreeMap` (as valid symbol id ranges could now be
disjoint), and the symbol interner is known to be fairly perf-sensitive.
This patch adds checks to the execution strategy to use the cross-thread
executor when doing nested invocations. An alternative implementation
strategy could be to track this information in the `ExtCtxt`, however a
thread-local in the `proc_macro` crate was chosen to add an assertion so
that `rust-analyzer` is aware of the issue if it implements
`expand_expr` in the future.
r? @eddyb
This removes some RPC when creating and emitting diagnostics, and
simplifies the bridge slightly.
After this change, there are no remaining methods which take advantage
of the support for `&mut` references to objects in the store as
arguments, meaning that support for them could technically be removed if
we wanted. The only remaining uses of immutable references into the
store are `TokenStream` and `SourceFile`.
This is done by having the crossbeam dependency inserted into the
proc_macro server code from the server side, to avoid adding a
dependency to proc_macro.
In addition, this introduces a -Z command-line option which will switch
rustc to run proc-macros using this cross-thread executor. With the
changes to the bridge in #98186, #98187, #98188 and #98189, the
performance of the executor should be much closer to same-thread
execution.
In local testing, the crossbeam executor was substantially more
performant than either of the two existing CrossThread strategies, so
they have been removed to keep things simple.
This method is still only used for Literal::subspan, however the
implementation only depends on the Span component, so it is simpler and
more efficient for now to pass down only the information that is needed.
In the future, if more information about the Literal is required in the
implementation (e.g. to validate that spans line up as expected with
source text), that extra information can be added back with extra
arguments.
