Relate alias ty with variance
In the new solver, turns out that the subst-relate branch of the alias-relate predicate was relating args invariantly even for opaques, which have variance 💀.
This change is a bit more invasive, but I'd rather not special-case it [here](aeaa5c30e5/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/solve/alias_relate.rs (L171-L190)) and then have it break elsewhere. I'm doing a perf run to see if the extra call to `def_kind` is that expensive, if it is, I'll reconsider.
r? ``@lcnr``
Extend `impl`'s `def_span` to include its where clauses
Typically, we highlight the def-span of an impl in a diagnostic due to either:
1. coherence error
2. trait evaluation cycle
3. invalid implementation of built-in trait
I find that an impl's where clauses are very often required to understanding why these errors come about, which is unfortunate since where clauses may be located on different lines and don't show up in the error. This PR expands the def-span of impls to include these where clauses.
r? cjgillot since you've touched this code a while back to make some spans shorter, but you can also reassign to wg-diagnostics or compiler if you're busy or have no strong opinions.
improve the suggestion of `generic_bound_failure`
- Fixes#115375
- suggest the bound in the correct scope: trait or impl header vs assoc item. See `tests/ui/suggestions/lifetimes/type-param-bound-scope.rs`
- don't suggest a lifetime name that conflicts with the other late-bound regions of the function:
```rust
type Inv<'a> = *mut &'a ();
fn check_bound<'a, T: 'a>(_: T, _: Inv<'a>) {}
fn test<'a, T>(_: &'a str, t: T, lt: Inv<'_>) { // suggests a new name `'a`
check_bound(t, lt); //~ ERROR
}
```
Generalize small dominators optimization
* Use small dominators optimization from 640ede7b0a more generally.
* Merge `DefLocation` and `LocationExtended` since they serve the same purpose.
remove Key impls for types that involve an AllocId
I don't understand how but somehow that leads to issues like https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/83085? Anyway removing unused impls doesn't seem like a bad idea. The concerning part is that of course nothing will stop us from having such impls again in the future, alongside re-introducing bugs like #83085.
r? `@oli-obk`
Bring back generic parameters for indices in rustc_abi and make it compile on stable
This effectively reverses https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107163, allowing rust-analyzer to depend on this crate again,
It also moves some glob imports / expands them in the first commit because they made it more difficult for me to reason about things.
The word "active" is currently used in two different and confusing ways:
- `ACTIVE_FEATURES` actually means "available unstable features"
- `Features::active_features` actually means "features declared in the
crate's code", which can include feature within `ACTIVE_FEATURES` but
also others.
(This is also distinct from "enabled" features which includes declared
features but also some edition-specific features automatically enabled
depending on the edition in use.)
This commit changes the `Features::active_features` to
`Features::declared_features` which actually matches its meaning.
Likewise, `Features::active` becomes `Features::declared`.
Remove the `TypedArena::alloc_from_iter` specialization.
It was added in #78569. It's complicated and doesn't actually help
performance.
r? `@cjgillot`
coverage: Allow each coverage statement to have multiple code regions
The original implementation of coverage instrumentation was built around the assumption that a coverage counter/expression would be associated with *up to one* code region. When it was discovered that *multiple* regions would sometimes need to share a counter, a workaround was found: for the remaining regions, the instrumentor would create a fresh expression that adds zero to the existing counter/expression.
That got the job done, but resulted in some awkward code, and produces unnecessarily complicated coverage maps in the final binary.
---
This PR removes that tension by changing `StatementKind::Coverage`'s code region field from `Option<CodeRegion>` to `Vec<CodeRegion>`.
The changes on the codegen side are fairly straightforward. As long as each `CoverageKind::Counter` only injects one `llvm.instrprof.increment`, the rest of coverage codegen is happy to handle multiple regions mapped to the same counter/expression, with only minor option-to-vec adjustments.
On the instrumentor/mir-transform side, we can get rid of the code that creates extra (x + 0) expressions. Instead we gather all of the code regions associated with a single BCB, and inject them all into one coverage statement.
---
There are several patches here but they can be divided in to three phases:
- Preparatory work
- Actually switching over to multiple regions per coverage statement
- Cleaning up
So viewing the patches individually may be easier.
a small wf and clause cleanup
- remove `Clause::from_projection_clause`, instead use `ToPredicate`
- change `predicate_obligations` to directly take a `Clause`
- remove some unnecessary `&`
- use clause in `min_specialization` checks where easily applicable
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #115863 (Add check_unused_messages in tidy)
- #116210 (Ensure that `~const` trait bounds on associated functions are in const traits or impls)
- #116358 (Rename both of the `Match` relations)
- #116371 (Remove unused features from `rustc_llvm`.)
- #116374 (Print normalized ty)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
When these methods were originally written, I wasn't aware that
`newtype_index!` already supports addition with ordinary numbers, without
needing to unwrap and re-wrap.
Cleanup number handling in match exhaustiveness
Doing a little bit of cleanup; handling number constants was somewhat messy. In particular, this:
- evals float consts once instead of repetitively
- reduces `Constructor` from 88 bytes to 56 (`mir::Const` is big!)
The `fast_try_eval_bits` function was mostly constructed from inlining existing code but I don't fully understand it; I don't follow how consts work and are evaluated very well.
Assorted improvements for `rustc_middle::mir::traversal`
r? `@cjgillot`
I'm not _entirely_ sure about all changes, although I do like all of them. If you'd like I can drop some commits. Best reviewed on a commit-by-commit basis, I think, since they are fairly isolated.
