The `error-format=short` output only displays the path, error code and
main error message all in the same line. We now add the primary span label
as well after the error message, to provide more context.
Change output normalization logic to be linear against size of output
Modify the rendered output normalization routine to scan each character *once* and construct a `String` to be printed out to the terminal *once*, instead of using `String::replace` in a loop multiple times. The output doesn't change, but the time spent to prepare a diagnostic is now faster (or rather, closer to what it was before #127528).
Tweak type inference for `const` operands in inline asm
Previously these would be treated like integer literals and default to `i32` if a type could not be determined. To allow for forward-compatibility with `str` constants in the future, this PR changes type inference to use an unbound type variable instead.
The actual type checking is deferred until after typeck where we still ensure that the final type for the `const` operand is an integer type.
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
interpret: move nullary-op evaluation into operator.rs
We call it an operator, so we might as well treat it like one. :)
Also use more consistent naming for the "evaluate intrinsic" functions. "emulate" is really the wrong term, this *is* a genuine implementation of the intrinsic semantics after all.
Use `ParamEnv::reveal_all` in CFI
I left a huge comment for why this ICEs in the test I committed.
`typeid_for_instance` should only be called on monomorphic instances during codegen, and we should just be using `ParamEnv::reveal_all()` rather than the param-env of the instance itself. I added an assertion to ensure that we only do this for fully substituted instances (this may break with polymorphization, but I kinda don't care lol).
Fixes#114160
cc `@rcvalle`
Since [1], `Cargo.lock` was split into `Cargo.lock` and
`library/Cargo.lock`. Update Triagebot to give the same warning for both.
[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/128534
Add `Debug` impls to API types in `rustc_codegen_ssa`
Some types used in `rustc_codegen_ssa`'s interface traits are missing `Debug` impls. Though I did not smear `#[derive(Debug)]` all over the crate (some structs are quite large).
Don't re-elaborated already elaborated caller bounds in method probe
Caller bounds are already elaborated. Only elaborate object candidates' principals.
Also removes the only usage of `transitive_bounds`.
Enforce supertrait outlives obligations hold when confirming impl
**TL;DR:** We elaborate super-predicates and apply any outlives obligations when proving an impl holds to fix a mismatch between implied bounds.
Bugs in implied bounds (and implied well-formedness) occur whenever there is a mismatch between the assumptions that some code can assume to hold, and the obligations that a caller/user of that code must prove. If the former is stronger than the latter, then unsoundness occurs.
Take a look at the example unsoundness:
```rust
use std::fmt::Display;
trait Static: 'static {}
impl<T> Static for &'static T {}
fn foo<S: Display>(x: S) -> Box<dyn Display>
where
&'static S: Static,
{
Box::new(x)
}
fn main() {
let s = foo(&String::from("blah blah blah"));
println!("{}", s);
}
```
This specific example occurs because we elaborate obligations in `fn foo`:
* `&'static S: Static`
* `&'static S: 'static` <- super predicate
* `S: 'static` <- elaborating outlives bounds
However, when calling `foo`, we only need to prove the direct set of where clauses. So at the call site for some substitution `S = &'not_static str`, that means only proving `&'static &'not_static str: Static`. To prove this, we apply the impl, which itself holds trivially since it has no where clauses.
This is the mismatch -- `foo` is allowed to assume that `S: 'static` via elaborating supertraits, but callers of `foo` never need to prove that `S: 'static`.
There are several approaches to fixing this, all of which have problems due to current limitations in our type system:
1. proving the elaborated set of predicates always - This leads to issues since we don't have coinductive trait semantics, so we easily hit new cycles.
* This would fix our issue, since callers of `foo` would have to both prove `&'static &'not_static str: Static` and its elaborated bounds, which would surface the problematic `'not_static: 'static` outlives obligation.
* However, proving supertraits when proving impls leads to inductive cycles which can't be fixed until we get coinductive trait semantics.
2. Proving that an impl header is WF when applying that impl:
* This would fix our issue, since when we try to prove `&'static &'not_static str: Static`, we'd need to prove `WF(&'static &'not_static str)`, which would surface the problematic `'not_static: 'static` outlives obligation.
* However, this leads to issues since we don't have higher-ranked implied bounds. This breaks things when trying to apply impls to higher-ranked trait goals.
To get around these limitations, we apply a subset of (1.), which is to elaborate the supertrait obligations of the impl but filter only the (region/type) outlives out of that set, since those can never participate in an inductive cycle. This is likely not sufficient to fix a pathological example of this issue, but it does clearly fill in a major gap that we're currently overlooking.
This can also result in 'unintended' errors due to missing implied-bounds on binders. We did not encounter this in the crater run and don't expect people to rely on this code in practice:
```rust
trait Outlives<'b>: 'b {}
impl<'b, T> Outlives<'b> for &'b T {}
fn foo<'b>()
where
// This bound will break due to this PR as we end up proving
// `&'b &'!a (): 'b` without the implied `'!a: 'b`
// bound.
for<'a> &'b &'a (): Outlives<'b>,
{}
```
Fixes#98117
---
Crater: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124336#issuecomment-2209165320
Triaged: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124336#issuecomment-2236321325
All of the fallout is due to generic const exprs, and can be ignored.
Migrate `reproducible-build-2` and `stable-symbol-names` `run-make` tests to rmake
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
Needs try-jobs.
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: armhf-gnu
try-job: test-various
try-job: aarch64-apple
try-job: i686-msvc
try-job: x86_64-mingw
