Currently many diagnostic modifier methods are available on both
`Diagnostic` and `DiagnosticBuilder`. This commit removes most of them
from `Diagnostic`. To minimize the diff size, it keeps them within
`diagnostic.rs` but changes the surrounding `impl Diagnostic` block to
`impl DiagnosticBuilder`. (I intend to move things around later, to give
a more sensible code layout.)
`Diagnostic` keeps a few methods that it still needs, like `sub`,
`arg`, and `replace_args`.
The `forward!` macro, which defined two additional methods per call
(e.g. `note` and `with_note`), is replaced by the `with_fn!` macro,
which defines one additional method per call (e.g. `with_note`). It's
now also only used when necessary -- not all modifier methods currently
need a `with_*` form. (New ones can be easily added as necessary.)
All this also requires changing `trait AddToDiagnostic` so its methods
take `DiagnosticBuilder` instead of `Diagnostic`, which leads to many
mechanical changes. `SubdiagnosticMessageOp` gains a type parameter `G`.
There are three subdiagnostics -- `DelayedAtWithoutNewline`,
`DelayedAtWithNewline`, and `InvalidFlushedDelayedDiagnosticLevel` --
that are created within the diagnostics machinery and appended to
external diagnostics. These are handled at the `Diagnostic` level, which
means it's now hard to construct them via `derive(Diagnostic)`, so
instead we construct them by hand. This has no effect on what they look
like when printed.
There are lots of new `allow` markers for `untranslatable_diagnostics`
and `diagnostics_outside_of_impl`. This is because
`#[rustc_lint_diagnostics]` annotations were present on the `Diagnostic`
modifier methods, but missing from the `DiagnosticBuilder` modifier
methods. They're now present.
Improve handling of expressions in patterns
Closes#112593.
Methodcalls' dots in patterns are silently recovered as commas (e.g. `Foo("".len())` -> `Foo("", len())`) so extra diagnostics are emitted:
```rs
struct Foo(u8, String, u8);
fn bar(foo: Foo) -> bool {
match foo {
Foo(4, "yippee".yeet(), 7) => true,
_ => false
}
}
```
```
error: expected one of `)`, `,`, `...`, `..=`, `..`, or `|`, found `.`
--> main.rs:5:24
|
5 | Foo(4, "yippee".yeet(), 7) => true,
| ^
| |
| expected one of `)`, `,`, `...`, `..=`, `..`, or `|`
| help: missing `,`
error[E0531]: cannot find tuple struct or tuple variant `yeet` in this scope
--> main.rs:5:25
|
5 | Foo(4, "yippee".yeet(), 7) => true,
| ^^^^ not found in this scope
error[E0023]: this pattern has 4 fields, but the corresponding tuple struct has 3 fields
--> main.rs:5:13
|
1 | struct Foo(u8, String, u8);
| -- ------ -- tuple struct has 3 fields
...
5 | Foo(4, "yippee".yeet(), 7) => true,
| ^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^ expected 3 fields, found 4
error: aborting due to 3 previous errors
```
This PR checks for patterns that ends with a dot and a lowercase ident (as structs/variants should be uppercase):
```
error: expected a pattern, found a method call
--> main.rs:5:16
|
5 | Foo(4, "yippee".yeet(), 7) => true,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ method calls are not allowed in patterns
error: aborting due to 1 previous error
```
Also check for expressions:
```rs
fn is_idempotent(x: f32) -> bool {
match x {
x * x => true,
_ => false,
}
}
fn main() {
let mut t: [i32; 5];
let t[0] = 1;
}
```
```
error: expected a pattern, found an expression
--> main.rs:3:9
|
3 | x * x => true,
| ^^^^^ arbitrary expressions are not allowed in patterns
error: expected a pattern, found an expression
--> main.rs:10:9
|
10 | let t[0] = 1;
| ^^^^ arbitrary expressions are not allowed in patterns
```
Would be cool if the compiler could suggest adding a guard for `match`es, but I've no idea how to do it.
---
`@rustbot` label +A-diagnostics +A-parser +A-patterns +C-enhancement
Error codes are integers, but `String` is used everywhere to represent
them. Gross!
This commit introduces `ErrCode`, an integral newtype for error codes,
replacing `String`. It also introduces a constant for every error code,
e.g. `E0123`, and removes the `error_code!` macro. The constants are
imported wherever used with `use rustc_errors::codes::*`.
With the old code, we have three different ways to specify an error code
at a use point:
```
error_code!(E0123) // macro call
struct_span_code_err!(dcx, span, E0123, "msg"); // bare ident arg to macro call
\#[diag(name, code = "E0123")] // string
struct Diag;
```
With the new code, they all use the `E0123` constant.
```
E0123 // constant
struct_span_code_err!(dcx, span, E0123, "msg"); // constant
\#[diag(name, code = E0123)] // constant
struct Diag;
```
The commit also changes the structure of the error code definitions:
- `rustc_error_codes` now just defines a higher-order macro listing the
used error codes and nothing else.
- Because that's now the only thing in the `rustc_error_codes` crate, I
moved it into the `lib.rs` file and removed the `error_codes.rs` file.
- `rustc_errors` uses that macro to define everything, e.g. the error
code constants and the `DIAGNOSTIC_TABLES`. This is in its new
`codes.rs` file.
Detect `NulInCStr` error earlier.
By making it an `EscapeError` instead of a `LitError`. This makes it like the other errors produced when checking string literals contents, e.g. for invalid escape sequences or bare CR chars.
NOTE: this means these errors are issued earlier, before expansion, which changes behaviour. It will be possible to move the check back to the later point if desired. If that happens, it's likely that all the string literal contents checks will be delayed together.
One nice thing about this: the old approach had some code in `report_lit_error` to calculate the span of the nul char from a range. This code used a hardwired `+2` to account for the `c"` at the start of a C string literal, but this should have changed to a `+3` for raw C string literals to account for the `cr"`, which meant that the caret in `cr"` nul error messages was one short of where it should have been. The new approach doesn't need any of this and avoids the off-by-one error.
r? ```@fee1-dead```
By making it an `EscapeError` instead of a `LitError`. This makes it
like the other errors produced when checking string literals contents,
e.g. for invalid escape sequences or bare CR chars.
NOTE: this means these errors are issued earlier, before expansion,
which changes behaviour. It will be possible to move the check back to
the later point if desired. If that happens, it's likely that all the
string literal contents checks will be delayed together.
One nice thing about this: the old approach had some code in
`report_lit_error` to calculate the span of the nul char from a range.
This code used a hardwired `+2` to account for the `c"` at the start of
a C string literal, but this should have changed to a `+3` for raw C
string literals to account for the `cr"`, which meant that the caret in
`cr"` nul error messages was one short of where it should have been. The
new approach doesn't need any of this and avoids the off-by-one error.
Rollup of 10 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #118521 (Enable address sanitizer for MSVC targets using INFERASANLIBS linker flag)
- #119026 (std::net::bind using -1 for openbsd which in turn sets it to somaxconn.)
- #119195 (Make named_asm_labels lint not trigger on unicode and trigger on format args)
- #119204 (macro_rules: Less hacky heuristic for using `tt` metavariable spans)
- #119362 (Make `derive(Trait)` suggestion more accurate)
- #119397 (Recover parentheses in range patterns)
- #119417 (Uplift some miscellaneous coroutine-specific machinery into `check_closure`)
- #119539 (Fix typos)
- #119540 (Don't synthesize host effect args inside trait object types)
- #119555 (Add codegen test for RVO on MaybeUninit)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
`Diagnostic` has 40 methods that return `&mut Self` and could be
considered setters. Four of them have a `set_` prefix. This doesn't seem
necessary for a type that implements the builder pattern. This commit
removes the `set_` prefixes on those four methods.
`IntoDiagnostic` defaults to `ErrorGuaranteed`, because errors are the
most common diagnostic level. It makes sense to do likewise for the
closely-related (and much more widely used) `DiagnosticBuilder` type,
letting us write `DiagnosticBuilder<'a, ErrorGuaranteed>` as just
`DiagnosticBuilder<'a>`. This cuts over 200 lines of code due to many
multi-line things becoming single line things.
And make all hand-written `IntoDiagnostic` impls generic, by using
`DiagnosticBuilder::new(dcx, level, ...)` instead of e.g.
`dcx.struct_err(...)`.
This means the `create_*` functions are the source of the error level.
This change will let us remove `struct_diagnostic`.
Note: `#[rustc_lint_diagnostics]` is added to `DiagnosticBuilder::new`,
it's necessary to pass diagnostics tests now that it's used in
`into_diagnostic` functions.
It's necessary for `derive(Diagnostic)`, but is best avoided elsewhere
because there are clearer alternatives.
This required adding `Handler::struct_almost_fatal`.
discard invalid spans in external blocks
Fixes#116203
This PR has discarded the invalid `const_span`, thereby making the format more neat.
r? ``@Nilstrieb``
These impls are all needed for just a single `IntoDiagnostic` type, not
a family of them.
Note that `ErrorGuaranteed` is the default type parameter for
`IntoDiagnostic`.
Suggest `let` or `==` on typo'd let-chain
When encountering a bare assignment in a let-chain, suggest turning the
assignment into a `let` expression or an equality check.
```
error: expected expression, found `let` statement
--> $DIR/bad-if-let-suggestion.rs:5:8
|
LL | if let x = 1 && i = 2 {}
| ^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: only supported directly in conditions of `if` and `while` expressions
help: you might have meant to continue the let-chain
|
LL | if let x = 1 && let i = 2 {}
| +++
help: you might have meant to compare for equality
|
LL | if let x = 1 && i == 2 {}
| +
```
When encountering a bare assignment in a let-chain, suggest turning the
assignment into a `let` expression or an equality check.
```
error: expected expression, found `let` statement
--> $DIR/bad-if-let-suggestion.rs:5:8
|
LL | if let x = 1 && i = 2 {}
| ^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: only supported directly in conditions of `if` and `while` expressions
help: you might have meant to continue the let-chain
|
LL | if let x = 1 && let i = 2 {}
| +++
help: you might have meant to compare for equality
|
LL | if let x = 1 && i == 2 {}
| +
```
Recover `dyn` and `impl` after `for<...>`
Recover `dyn` and `impl` after `for<...>` in types. Reuses the logic for parsing bare trait objects, so it doesn't fix cases like `for<'a> dyn Trait + dyn Trait` or anything, but that seems somewhat of a different issue.
Parsing recovery logic is a bit involved, but I couldn't find a way to simplify it.
Fixes#117882
Give a better diagnostic for missing parens in Fn* bounds
Fixes#108109
It would be nice to try and recover here, but I'm not sure it's worth the effort, especially as the bounds on the recovered function would be incorrect.
```
error: expected one of `,`, `:`, or `}`, found `.`
--> $DIR/missing-fat-arrow.rs:25:14
|
LL | Some(a) if a.value == b {
| - while parsing this struct
LL | a.value = 1;
| -^ expected one of `,`, `:`, or `}`
| |
| while parsing this struct field
|
help: try naming a field
|
LL | a: a.value = 1;
| ++
help: you might have meant to start a match arm after the match guard
|
LL | Some(a) if a.value == b => {
| ++
```
Fix#78585.
- Add doc comment to new type
- Restore "only supported directly in conditions of `if` and `while` expressions" note
- Rename variant with clearer name
There was an incomplete version of the check in parsing and a second
version in AST validation. This meant that some, but not all, invalid
uses were allowed inside macros/disabled cfgs. It also means that later
passes have a hard time knowing when the let expression is in a valid
location, sometimes causing ICEs.
- Add a field to ExprKind::Let in AST/HIR to mark whether it's in a
valid location.
- Suppress later errors and MIR construction for invalid let
expressions.
Gracefully handle ternary operator
Fixes#112578
~~May not be the best way to do this as it doesn't check for a single `:`, so it could perhaps appear even when the actual issue is just a missing semicolon. May not be the biggest deal, though?~~
Nevermind, got it working properly now ^^
My type ascription
Oh rip it out
Ah
If you think we live too much then
You can sacrifice diagnostics
Don't mix your garbage
Into my syntax
So many weird hacks keep diagnostics alive
Yet I don't even step outside
So many bad diagnostics keep tyasc alive
Yet tyasc doesn't even bother to survive!
Instead of loading the Fluent resources for every crate in
`rustc_error_messages`, each crate generates typed identifiers for its
own diagnostics and creates a static which are pulled together in the
`rustc_driver` crate and provided to the diagnostic emitter.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Improve diagnostic for missing space in range pattern
Improves the diagnostic in #107425 by turning it into a note explaining the parsing issue.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Adds an additional hint to failures where we encounter an else keyword
while we're parsing an if-let block.
This is likely that the user has accidentally mixed if-let and let...else
together.
Recover from where clauses placed before tuple struct bodies
Open to any suggestions regarding the phrasing of the diagnostic.
Fixes#100790.
`@rustbot` label A-diagnostics
r? diagnostics
Instead of `ast::Lit`.
Literal lowering now happens at two different times. Expression literals
are lowered when HIR is crated. Attribute literals are lowered during
parsing.
This commit changes the language very slightly. Some programs that used
to not compile now will compile. This is because some invalid literals
that are removed by `cfg` or attribute macros will no longer trigger
errors. See this comment for more details:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/102944#issuecomment-1277476773
Recover from function pointer types with generic parameter list
Give a more helpful error when encountering function pointer types with a generic parameter list like `fn<'a>(&'a str) -> bool` or `fn<T>(T) -> T` and suggest moving lifetime parameters to a `for<>` parameter list.
I've added a bunch of extra code to properly handle (unlikely?) corner cases like `for<'a> fn<'b>()` (where there already exists a `for<>` parameter list) correctly suggesting `for<'a, 'b> fn()` (merging the lists). If you deem this useless, I can simplify the code by suggesting nothing at all in this case.
I am quite open to suggestions regarding the wording of the diagnostic messages.
Fixes#103487.
``@rustbot`` label A-diagnostics
r? diagnostics
