make `order_dependent_trait_objects` show up in future-breakage reports
tried to change it to a hard error in #102474 but breaking the more than 1000 dependents of `traitobject` doesn't feel great 😅
This lint has existed since more than 3 years now and the way this is currently implemented is buggy and will break with #102472. imo we should upgrade it to also report for dependencies and maybe also backport this to beta. Then after maybe 2-3 stable versions I would like to finally convert this lint to a hard error.
Rewrite representability
* Improve placement of `Box` in the suggestion
* Multiple items in a cycle emit 1 error instead of an error for each item in the cycle
* Introduce `representability` query to avoid traversing an item every time it is used.
* Also introduce `params_in_repr` query to avoid traversing generic items every time it is used.
Stabilize generic associated types
Closes#44265
r? `@nikomatsakis`
# ⚡ Status of the discussion ⚡
* [x] There have been several serious concerns raised, [summarized here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/96709#issuecomment-1129311660).
* [x] There has also been a [deep-dive comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/96709#issuecomment-1167220240) explaining some of the "patterns of code" that are enabled by GATs, based on use-cases posted to this thread or on the tracking issue.
* [x] We have modeled some aspects of GATs in [a-mir-formality](https://github.com/nikomatsakis/a-mir-formality) to give better confidence in how they will be resolved in the future. [You can read a write-up here](https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/blob/master/minutes/2022-07-08-implied-bounds-and-wf-checking.md).
* [x] The major points of the discussion have been [summarized on the GAT initiative repository](https://rust-lang.github.io/generic-associated-types-initiative/mvp.html).
* [x] [FCP has been proposed](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/96709#issuecomment-1129311660) and we are awaiting final decisions and discussion amidst the relevant team members.
# Stabilization proposal
This PR proposes the stabilization of `#![feature(generic_associated_types)]`. While there a number of future additions to be made and bugs to be fixed (both discussed below), properly doing these will require significant language design and will ultimately likely be backwards-compatible. Given the overwhelming desire to have some form of generic associated types (GATs) available on stable and the stability of the "simple" uses, stabilizing the current subset of GAT features is almost certainly the correct next step.
Tracking issue: #44265
Initiative: https://rust-lang.github.io/generic-associated-types-initiative/
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1598-generic_associated_types.md
Version: 1.65 (2022-08-22 => beta, 2022-11-03 => stable).
## Motivation
There are a myriad of potential use cases for GATs. Stabilization unblocks probable future language features (e.g. async functions in traits), potential future standard library features (e.g. a `LendingIterator` or some form of `Iterator` with a lifetime generic), and a plethora of user use cases (some of which can be seen just by scrolling through the tracking issue and looking at all the issues linking to it).
There are a myriad of potential use cases for GATs. First, there are many users that have chosen to not use GATs primarily because they are not stable (some of which can be seen just by scrolling through the tracking issue and looking at all the issues linking to it). Second, while language feature desugaring isn't *blocked* on stabilization, it gives more confidence on using the feature. Likewise, library features like `LendingIterator` are not necessarily blocked on stabilization to be implemented unstably; however few, if any, public-facing APIs actually use unstable features.
This feature has a long history of design, discussion, and developement - the RFC was first introduced roughly 6 years ago. While there are still a number of features left to implement and bugs left to fix, it's clear that it's unlikely those will have backwards-incompatibility concerns. Additionally, the bugs that do exist do not strongly impede the most-common use cases.
## What is stabilized
The primary language feature stabilized here is the ability to have generics on associated types, as so. Additionally, where clauses on associated types will now be accepted, regardless if the associated type is generic or not.
```rust
trait ATraitWithGATs {
type Assoc<'a, T> where T: 'a;
}
trait ATraitWithoutGATs<'a, T> {
type Assoc where T: 'a;
}
```
When adding an impl for a trait with generic associated types, the generics for the associated type are copied as well. Note that where clauses are allowed both after the specified type and before the equals sign; however, the latter is a warn-by-default deprecation.
```rust
struct X;
struct Y;
impl ATraitWithGATs for X {
type Assoc<'a, T> = &'a T
where T: 'a;
}
impl ATraitWithGATs for Y {
type Assoc<'a, T>
where T: 'a
= &'a T;
}
```
To use a GAT in a function, generics are specified on the associated type, as if it was a struct or enum. GATs can also be specified in trait bounds:
```rust
fn accepts_gat<'a, T>(t: &'a T) -> T::Assoc<'a, T>
where for<'x> T: ATraitWithGATs<Assoc<'a, T> = &'a T> {
...
}
```
GATs can also appear in trait methods. However, depending on how they are used, they may confer where clauses on the associated type definition. More information can be found [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87479). Briefly, where clauses are required when those bounds can be proven in the methods that *construct* the GAT or other associated types that use the GAT in the trait. This allows impls to have maximum flexibility in the types defined for the associated type.
To take a relatively simple example:
```rust
trait Iterable {
type Item<'a>;
type Iterator<'a>: Iterator<Item = Self::Item<'a>>;
fn iter<'x>(&'x self) -> Self::Iterator<'x>;
//^ We know that `Self: 'a` for `Iterator<'a>`, so we require that bound on `Iterator`
// `Iterator` uses `Self::Item`, so we also require a `Self: 'a` on `Item` too
}
```
A couple well-explained examples are available in a previous [blog post](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2021/08/03/GATs-stabilization-push.html).
## What isn't stabilized/implemented
### Universal type/const quantification
Currently, you can write a bound like `X: for<'a> Trait<Assoc<'a> = &'a ()>`. However, you cannot currently write `for<T> X: Trait<Assoc<T> = T>` or `for<const N> X: Trait<Assoc<N> = [usize; N]>`.
Here is an example where this is needed:
```rust
trait Foo {}
trait Trait {
type Assoc<F: Foo>;
}
trait Trait2: Sized {
fn foo<F: Foo, T: Trait<Assoc<F> = F>>(_t: T);
}
```
In the above example, the *caller* must specify `F`, which is likely not what is desired.
### Object-safe GATs
Unlike non-generic associated types, traits with GATs are not currently object-safe. In other words the following are not allowed:
```rust
trait Trait {
type Assoc<'a>;
}
fn foo(t: &dyn for<'a> Trait<Assoc<'a> = &'a ()>) {}
//^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ not allowed
let ty: Box<dyn for<'a> Trait<Assoc<'a> = &'a ()>>;
//^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ not allowed
```
### Higher-kinded types
You cannot write currently (and there are no current plans to implement this):
```rust
struct Struct<'a> {}
fn foo(s: for<'a> Struct<'a>) {}
```
## Tests
There are many tests covering GATs that can be found in `src/test/ui/generic-associated-types`. Here, I'll list (in alphanumeric order) tests highlight some important behavior or contain important patterns.
- `./parse/*`: Parsing of GATs in traits and impls, and the trait path with GATs
- `./collections-project-default.rs`: Interaction with associated type defaults
- `./collections.rs`: The `Collection` pattern
- `./const-generics-gat-in-trait-return-type-*.rs`: Const parameters
- `./constraint-assoc-type-suggestion.rs`: Emit correct syntax in suggestion
- `./cross-crate-bounds.rs`: Ensure we handles bounds across crates the same
- `./elided-in-expr-position.rs`: Disallow lifetime elision in return position
- `./gat-in-trait-path-undeclared-lifetime.rs`: Ensure we error on undeclared lifetime in trait path
- `./gat-in-trait-path.rs`: Base trait path case
- `./gat-trait-path-generic-type-arg.rs`: Don't allow shadowing of parameters
- `./gat-trait-path-parenthesised-args.rs`: Don't allow paranthesized args in trait path
- `./generic-associated-types-where.rs`: Ensure that we require where clauses from trait to be met on impl
- `./impl_bounds.rs`: Check that the bounds on GATs in an impl are checked
- `./issue-76826.rs`: `Windows` pattern
- `./issue-78113-lifetime-mismatch-dyn-trait-box.rs`: Implicit 'static diagnostics
- `./issue-84931.rs`: Ensure that we have a where clause on GAT to ensure trait parameter lives long enough
- `./issue-87258_a.rs`: Unconstrained opaque type with TAITs
- `./issue-87429-2.rs`: Ensure we can use bound vars in the bounds
- `./issue-87429-associated-type-default.rs`: Ensure bounds hold with associated type defaults, for both trait and impl
- `./issue-87429-specialization.rs`: Check that bounds hold under specialization
- `./issue-88595.rs`: Under the outlives lint, we require a bound for both trait and GAT lifetime when trait lifetime is used in function
- `./issue-90014.rs`: Lifetime bounds are checked with TAITs
- `./issue-91139.rs`: Under migrate mode, but not NLL, we don't capture implied bounds from HRTB lifetimes used in a function and GATs
- `./issue-91762.rs`: We used to too eagerly pick param env candidates when normalizing with GATs. We now require explicit parameters specified.
- `./issue-95305.rs`: Disallow lifetime elision in trait paths
- `./iterable.rs`: `Iterable` pattern
- `./method-unsatified-assoc-type-predicate.rs`: Print predicates with GATs correctly in method resolve error
- `./missing_lifetime_const.rs`: Ensure we must specify lifetime args (not elidable)
- `./missing-where-clause-on-trait.rs`: Ensure we don't allow stricter bounds on impl than trait
- `./parameter_number_and_kind_impl.rs`: Ensure paramters on GAT in impl match GAT in trait
- `./pointer_family.rs`: `PointerFamily` pattern
- `./projection-bound-cycle.rs`: Don't allow invalid cycles to prove bounds
- `./self-outlives-lint.rs`: Ensures that an e.g. `Self: 'a` is written on the traits GAT if that bound can be implied from the GAT usage in the trait
- `./shadowing.rs`: Don't allow lifetime shadowing in params
- `./streaming_iterator.rs`: `StreamingIterator`(`LendingIterator`) pattern
- `./trait-objects.rs`: Disallow trait objects for traits with GATs
- `./variance_constraints.rs`: Require that GAT substs be invariant
## Remaining bugs and open issues
A full list of remaining open issues can be found at: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/labels/F-generic_associated_types
There are some `known-bug` tests in-tree at `src/test/ui/generic-associated-types/bugs`.
Here I'll categorize most of those that GAT bugs (or involve a pattern found more with GATs), but not those that include GATs but not a GAT issue in and of itself. (I also won't include issues directly for things listed elsewhere here.)
Using the concrete type of a GAT instead of the projection type can give errors, since lifetimes are chosen to be early-bound vs late-bound.
- #85533
- #87803
In certain cases, we can run into cycle or overflow errors. This is more generally a problem with associated types.
- #87755
- #87758
Bounds on an associatd type need to be proven by an impl, but where clauses need to be proven by the usage. This can lead to confusion when users write one when they mean the other.
- #87831
- #90573
We sometimes can't normalize closure signatures fully. Really an asociated types issue, but might happen a bit more frequently with GATs, since more obvious place for HRTB lifetimes.
- #88382
When calling a function, we assign types to parameters "too late", after we already try (and fail) to normalize projections. Another associated types issue that might pop up more with GATs.
- #88460
- #96230
We don't fully have implied bounds for lifetimes appearing in GAT trait paths, which can lead to unconstrained type errors.
- #88526
Suggestion for adding lifetime bounds can suggest unhelpful fixes (`T: 'a` instead of `Self: 'a`), but the next compiler error after making the suggested change is helpful.
- #90816
- #92096
- #95268
We can end up requiring that `for<'a> I: 'a` when we really want `for<'a where I: 'a> I: 'a`. This can leave unhelpful errors than effectively can't be satisfied unless `I: 'static`. Requires bigger changes and not only GATs.
- #91693
Unlike with non-generic associated types, we don't eagerly normalize with param env candidates. This is intended behavior (for now), to avoid accidentaly stabilizing picking arbitrary impls.
- #91762
Some Iterator adapter patterns (namely `filter`) require Polonius or unsafe to work.
- #92985
## Potential Future work
### Universal type/const quantification
No work has been done to implement this. There are also some questions around implied bounds.
### Object-safe GATs
The intention is to make traits with GATs object-safe. There are some design work to be done around well-formedness rules and general implementation.
### GATified std lib types
It would be helpful to either introduce new std lib traits (like `LendingIterator`) or to modify existing ones (adding a `'a` generic to `Iterator::Item`). There also a number of other candidates, like `Index`/`IndexMut` and `Fn`/`FnMut`/`FnOnce`.
### Reduce the need for `for<'a>`
Seen [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1598#issuecomment-2611378730). One possible syntax:
```rust
trait Iterable {
type Iter<'a>: Iterator<Item = Self::Item<'a>>;
}
fn foo<T>() where T: Iterable, T::Item<let 'a>: Display { } //note the `let`!
```
### Better implied bounds on higher-ranked things
Currently if we have a `type Item<'a> where self: 'a`, and a `for<'a> T: Iterator<Item<'a> = &'a ()`, this requires `for<'a> Self: 'a`. Really, we want `for<'a where T: 'a> ...`
There was some mentions of this all the back in the RFC thread [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1598#issuecomment-264340514).
## Alternatives
### Make generics on associated type in bounds a binder
Imagine the bound `for<'a> T: Trait<Item<'a>= &'a ()>`. It might be that `for<'a>` is "too large" and it should instead be `T: Trait<for<'a> Item<'a>= &'a ()>`. Brought up in RFC thread [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1598#issuecomment-229443863) and in a few places since.
Another related question: Is `for<'a>` the right syntax? Maybe `where<'a>`? Also originally found in RFC thread [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1598#issuecomment-261639969).
### Stabilize lifetime GATs first
This has been brought up a few times. The idea is to only allow GATs with lifetime parameters to in initial stabilization. This was probably most useful prior to actual implementation. At this point, lifetimes, types, and consts are all implemented and work. It feels like an arbitrary split without strong reason.
## History
* On 2016-04-30, [RFC opened](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1598)
* On 2017-09-02, RFC merged and [tracking issue opened](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44265)
* On 2017-10-23, [Move Generics from MethodSig to TraitItem and ImplItem](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/44766)
* On 2017-12-01, [Generic Associated Types Parsing & Name Resolution](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/45904)
* On 2017-12-15, [https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/46706](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/46706)
* On 2018-04-23, [Feature gate where clauses on associated types](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/49368)
* On 2018-05-10, [Extend tests for RFC1598 (GAT)](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/49423)
* On 2018-05-24, [Finish implementing GATs (Chalk)](https://github.com/rust-lang/chalk/pull/134)
* On 2019-12-21, [Make GATs less ICE-prone](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/67160)
* On 2020-02-13, [fix lifetime shadowing check in GATs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/68938)
* On 2020-06-20, [Projection bound validation](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/72788)
* On 2020-10-06, [Separate projection bounds and predicates](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/73905)
* On 2021-02-05, [Generic associated types in trait paths](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79554)
* On 2021-02-06, [Trait objects do not work with generic associated types](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81823)
* On 2021-04-28, [Make traits with GATs not object safe](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/84622)
* On 2021-05-11, [Improve diagnostics for GATs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/82272)
* On 2021-07-16, [Make GATs no longer an incomplete feature](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/84623)
* On 2021-07-16, [Replace associated item bound vars with placeholders when projecting](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/86993)
* On 2021-07-26, [GATs: Decide whether to have defaults for `where Self: 'a`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87479)
* On 2021-08-25, [Normalize projections under binders](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/85499)
* On 2021-08-03, [The push for GATs stabilization](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2021/08/03/GATs-stabilization-push.html)
* On 2021-08-12, [Detect stricter constraints on gats where clauses in impls vs trait](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/88336)
* On 2021-09-20, [Proposal: Change syntax of where clauses on type aliases](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/89122)
* On 2021-11-06, [Implementation of GATs outlives lint](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89970)
* On 2021-12-29. [Parse and suggest moving where clauses after equals for type aliases](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/92118)
* On 2022-01-15, [Ignore static lifetimes for GATs outlives lint](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/92865)
* On 2022-02-08, [Don't constrain projection predicates with inference vars in GAT substs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/92917)
* On 2022-02-15, [Rework GAT where clause check](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93820)
* On 2022-02-19, [Only mark projection as ambiguous if GAT substs are constrained](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93892)
* On 2022-03-03, [Support GATs in Rustdoc](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/94009)
* On 2022-03-06, [Change location of where clause on GATs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/90076)
* On 2022-05-04, [A shiny future with GATs blog post](https://jackh726.github.io/rust/2022/05/04/a-shiny-future-with-gats.html)
* On 2022-05-04, [Stabilization PR](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/96709)
Fix a bunch of typo
This PR will fix some typos detected by [typos].
I only picked the ones I was sure were spelling errors to fix, mostly in
the comments.
[typos]: https://github.com/crate-ci/typos
This PR will fix some typos detected by [typos].
I only picked the ones I was sure were spelling errors to fix, mostly in
the comments.
[typos]: https://github.com/crate-ci/typos
Make forward compatibility lint deprecated_cfg_attr_crate_type_name deny by default
Turns the forward compatibility lint added by #83744 to deprecate `cfg_attr` usage with `#![crate_type]` and `#![crate_name]` attributes into deny by default. Copying the example from #83744:
```Rust
#![crate_type = "lib"] // remains working
#![cfg_attr(foo, crate_type = "bin")] // will stop working
```
Over 8 months have passed since #83744 was merged so I'd say this gives ample time for people to have been warned, so we can make the warning stronger. No usage was found via grep.app except for one, which was in an unmaintained code base that didn't seem to be used in the open source eco system. The crater run conducted in #83744 also didn't show up anything.
cc #91632 - tracking issue for the lint
Reenable disabled early syntax gates as future-incompatibility lints
- MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/535
The approach taken by this PR is
- Introduce a new lint, `unstable_syntax_pre_expansion`, and reenable the early syntax gates to emit it
- Use the diagnostic stashing mechanism to stash warnings the early warnings
- When the hard error occurs post expansion, steal and cancel the early warning
- Don't display any stashed warnings if errors are present to avoid the same noise problem that hiding type ascription errors is avoiding
Commits are working commits, but in a coherent steps-to-implement manner. Can be squashed if desired.
The preexisting `soft_unstable` lint seems like it would've been a good fit, but it is deny-by-default (appropriate for `#[bench]`) and these gates should be introduced as warn-by-default.
It may be desirable to change the stash mechanism's behavior to not flush lint errors in the presence of other errors either (like is done for warnings here), but upgrading a stash-using lint from warn to error perhaps is enough of a request to see the lint that they shouldn't be hidden; additionally, fixing the last error to get new errors thrown at you always feels bad, so if we know the lint errors are present, we should show them.
Using a new flag/mechanism for a "weak diagnostic" which is suppressed by other errors may also be desirable over assuming any stashed warnings are "weak," but this is the first user of stashing warnings and seems an appropriate use of stashing (it follows the "know more later to refine the diagnostic" pattern; here we learn that it's in a compiled position) so we get to define what it means to stash a non-hard-error diagnostic.
cc `````@petrochenkov````` (seconded MCP)
For named arguments used as implicit position arguments, underline both
the opening curly brace and either:
* if there is formatting, the next character (which will either be the
closing curl brace or the `:` denoting the start of formatting args)
* if there is no formatting, the entire arg span (important if there is
whitespace like `{ }`)
This should make it more obvious where the named argument should be.
Additionally, in the lint message, emit the formatting argument names
without a dollar sign to avoid potentially confusion.
Fixes#99907
Address issue #99265 by checking each positionally used argument
to see if the argument is named and adding a lint to use the name
instead. This way, when named arguments are used positionally in a
different order than their argument order, the suggested lint is
correct.
For example:
```
println!("{b} {}", a=1, b=2);
```
This will now generate the suggestion:
```
println!("{b} {a}", a=1, b=2);
```
Additionally, this check now also correctly replaces or inserts
only where the positional argument is (or would be if implicit).
Also, width and precision are replaced with their argument names
when they exists.
Since the issues were so closely related, this fix for issue #99265
also fixes issue #99266.
Fixes#99265Fixes#99266
Addresses Issue 98466 by emitting a warning if a named argument
is used like a position argument (i.e. the name is not used in
the string to be formatted).
Fixes rust-lang#98466
Finishing touches for `#[expect]` (RFC 2383)
This PR adds documentation and some functionality to rustc's lint passes, to manually fulfill expectations. This is needed for some lints in Clippy. Hopefully, it should be one of the last things before we can move forward with stabilizing this feature.
As part of this PR, I've also updated `clippy::duplicate_mod` to showcase how this new functionality can be used and to ensure that it works correctly.
---
changelog: [`duplicate_mod`]: Fixed lint attribute interaction
r? `@wesleywiser`
cc: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97660, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85549
And I guess that's it. Here have a magical unicorn 🦄
Fix FFI-unwind unsoundness with mixed panic mode
UB maybe introduced when an FFI exception happens in a `C-unwind` foreign function and it propagates through a crate compiled with `-C panic=unwind` into a crate compiled with `-C panic=abort` (#96926).
To prevent this unsoundness from happening, we will disallow a crate compiled with `-C panic=unwind` to be linked into `panic-abort` *if* it contains a call to `C-unwind` foreign function or function pointer. If no such call exists, then we continue to allow such mixed panic mode linking because it's sound (and stable). In fact we still need the ability to do mixed panic mode linking for std, because we only compile std once with `-C panic=unwind` and link it regardless panic strategy.
For libraries that wish to remain compile-once-and-linkable-to-both-panic-runtimes, a `ffi_unwind_calls` lint is added (gated under `c_unwind` feature gate) to flag any FFI unwind calls that will cause the linkable panic runtime be restricted.
In summary:
```rust
#![warn(ffi_unwind_calls)]
mod foo {
#[no_mangle]
pub extern "C-unwind" fn foo() {}
}
extern "C-unwind" {
fn foo();
}
fn main() {
// Call to Rust function is fine regardless ABI.
foo::foo();
// Call to foreign function, will cause the crate to be unlinkable to panic-abort if compiled with `-Cpanic=unwind`.
unsafe { foo(); }
//~^ WARNING call to foreign function with FFI-unwind ABI
let ptr: extern "C-unwind" fn() = foo::foo;
// Call to function pointer, will cause the crate to be unlinkable to panic-abort if compiled with `-Cpanic=unwind`.
ptr();
//~^ WARNING call to function pointer with FFI-unwind ABI
}
```
Fix#96926
`@rustbot` label: T-compiler F-c_unwind
This makes the transition easier as e.g. allow directives
won't fire the unknown lint warning once it is turned to
warn by default in the future. This is especially
important compared to other lints in the unused group
because the _ prefix trick doesn't exist for macro rules,
so allowing is the only option (either of unused_macro_rules,
or of the entire unused group, but that is not as informative
to readers). Allowing the lint also makes it possible to work
on possible heuristics for disabling the macro in specific
cases.
Implement a lint to warn about unused macro rules
This implements a new lint to warn about unused macro rules (arms/matchers), similar to the `unused_macros` lint added by #41907 that warns about entire macros.
```rust
macro_rules! unused_empty {
(hello) => { println!("Hello, world!") };
() => { println!("empty") }; //~ ERROR: 1st rule of macro `unused_empty` is never used
}
fn main() {
unused_empty!(hello);
}
```
Builds upon #96149 and #96156.
Fixes#73576
Remove `#[rustc_deprecated]`
This removes `#[rustc_deprecated]` and introduces diagnostics to help users to the right direction (that being `#[deprecated]`). All uses of `#[rustc_deprecated]` have been converted. CI is expected to fail initially; this requires #95958, which includes converting `stdarch`.
I plan on following up in a short while (maybe a bootstrap cycle?) removing the diagnostics, as they're only intended to be short-term.
Begin fixing all the broken doctests in `compiler/`
Begins to fix#95994.
All of them pass now but 24 of them I've marked with `ignore HELP (<explanation>)` (asking for help) as I'm unsure how to get them to work / if we should leave them as they are.
There are also a few that I marked `ignore` that could maybe be made to work but seem less important.
Each `ignore` has a rough "reason" for ignoring after it parentheses, with
- `(pseudo-rust)` meaning "mostly rust-like but contains foreign syntax"
- `(illustrative)` a somewhat catchall for either a fragment of rust that doesn't stand on its own (like a lone type), or abbreviated rust with ellipses and undeclared types that would get too cluttered if made compile-worthy.
- `(not-rust)` stuff that isn't rust but benefits from the syntax highlighting, like MIR.
- `(internal)` uses `rustc_*` code which would be difficult to make work with the testing setup.
Those reason notes are a bit inconsistently applied and messy though. If that's important I can go through them again and try a more principled approach. When I run `rg '```ignore \(' .` on the repo, there look to be lots of different conventions other people have used for this sort of thing. I could try unifying them all if that would be helpful.
I'm not sure if there was a better existing way to do this but I wrote my own script to help me run all the doctests and wade through the output. If that would be useful to anyone else, I put it here: https://github.com/Elliot-Roberts/rust_doctest_fixing_tool
Remove mutable_borrow_reservation_conflict lint and allow the code pattern
This was the only breaking issue with the NLL stabilization PR. Lang team decided to go ahead and allow this.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Closes#59159Closes#56254
Remove `--extern-location` and all associated code
`--extern-location` was an experiment to investigate the best way to
generate useful diagnostics for unused dependency warnings by enabling a
build system to identify the corresponding build config.
While I did successfully use this, I've since been convinced the
alternative `--json unused-externs` mechanism is the way to go, and
there's no point in having two mechanisms with basically the same
functionality.
This effectively reverts https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/72603
`--extern-location` was an experiment to investigate the best way to
generate useful diagnostics for unused dependency warnings by enabling a
build system to identify the corresponding build config.
While I did successfully use this, I've since been convinced the
alternative `--json unused-externs` mechanism is the way to go, and
there's no point in having two mechanisms with basically the same
functionality.
This effectively reverts https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/72603
* split `fuzzy_provenance_casts` into a ptr2int and a int2ptr lint
* feature gate both lints
* update documentation to be more realistic short term
* add tests for these lints
`MultiSpan` contains labels, which are more complicated with the
introduction of diagnostic translation and will use types from
`rustc_errors` - however, `rustc_errors` depends on `rustc_span` so
`rustc_span` cannot use types like `DiagnosticMessage` without
dependency cycles. Introduce a new `rustc_error_messages` crate that can
contain `DiagnosticMessage` and `MultiSpan`.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Improve `expect` impl and handle `#[expect(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` (RFC 2383)
This PR updates unstable `ExpectationIds` in stashed diagnostics and adds some asserts to ensure that the stored expectations are really empty in the end. Additionally, it handles the `#[expect(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` case.
According to the [Errors and lints docs](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/diagnostics.html#diagnostic-levels) the `error` level should only be used _"when the compiler detects a problem that makes it unable to compile the program"_. As this isn't the case with `#[expect(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` I decided to only create a warning. To avoid adding a new lint only for this case, I simply emit a `unfulfilled_lint_expectations` diagnostic with an additional note.
---
r? `@wesleywiser` I'm requesting a review from you since you reviewed the previous PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87835. You are welcome to reassign it if you're busy 🙃
rfc: [RFC-2383](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html)
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85549
cc: `@flip1995` In case you're also interested in this :)
Treat unstable lints as unknown
This change causes unstable lints to be ignored if the `unknown_lints`
lint is allowed. To achieve this, it also changes lints to apply as soon
as they are processed. Previously, lints in the same set were processed
as a batch and then all simultaneously applied.
Implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/469
This updates the standard library's documentation to use the new syntax. The
documentation is worthwhile to update as it should be more idiomatic
(particularly for features like this, which are nice for users to get acquainted
with). The general codebase is likely more hassle than benefit to update: it'll
hurt git blame, and generally updates can be done by folks updating the code if
(and when) that makes things more readable with the new format.
A few places in the compiler and library code are updated (mostly just due to
already having been done when this commit was first authored).
This also affects the `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns` and
`must_not_suspend` lints as they are not stable. This also changes the
diagnostic level to pull from `unknown_lints` instead of always being
allow or deny.
This change causes unstable lints to be ignored if the `unknown_lints`
lint is allowed. To achieve this, it also changes lints to apply as soon
as they are processed. Previously, lints in the same set were processed
as a batch and then all simultaneously applied.
Implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/469
Add links to the reference and rust by example for asm! docs and lints
These were previously removed in #91728 due to broken links.
cc ``@ehuss`` since this updates the rust-by-example submodule
We already have a general mechanism for deduplicating reported
lints, so there's no need to have an additional one for early lints
specifically. This allows us to remove some `PartialEq` impls.
Transition unsupported naked functions future incompatibility lint into
an error:
* Naked functions must contain a single inline assembly block.
Introduced as future incompatibility lint in 1.50 #79653.
Change into an error fixes a soundness issue described in #32489.
* Naked functions must not use any forms of inline attribute.
Introduced as future incompatibility lint in 1.56 #87652.
Lint bare traits in AstConv.
Removing the lint from lowering allows to:
- make lowering querification easier;
- have the lint implementation in only one place.
r? `@estebank`
remove a empty line
import `module_to_string`
use `contains("test")`
show a suggestion in case module starts_with/ends_with "test"
replace `parent` with `containing`
They are also removed from the prelude as per the decision in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87228.
stdarch and compiler-builtins are updated to work with the new, stable
asm! and global_asm! macros.
The affected crates have had plenty of time to update.
By keeping these as lints rather than making them hard errors,
we ensure that downstream crates will still be able to compile,
even if they transitive depend on broken versions of the affected
crates.
This should hopefully discourage anyone from writing any
new code which relies on the backwards-compatibility behavior.
Actually add the feature to the lints ui test
Add tracking issue to the feature declaration
Rename feature gate to non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns_lint
Add more omitted_patterns lint feature gate
Add `deref_into_dyn_supertrait` lint.
Initial implementation of #89460. Resolves#89190.
Maybe also worth a beta backport if necessary.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
When `cargo report future-incompatibilities` is stabilized
(see #71249), this will cause dependencies that trigger
this lint to be included in the report.
Implement `#[must_not_suspend]`
implements #83310
Some notes on the impl:
1. The code that searches for the attribute on the ADT is basically copied from the `must_use` lint. It's not shared, as the logic did diverge
2. The RFC does specify that the attribute can be placed on fn's (and fn-like objects), like `must_use`. I think this is a direct copy from the `must_use` reference definition. This implementation does NOT support this, as I felt that ADT's (+ `impl Trait` + `dyn Trait`) cover the usecase's people actually want on the RFC, and adding an imp for the fn call case would be significantly harder. The `must_use` impl can do a single check at fn call stmt time, but `must_not_suspend` would need to answer the question: "for some value X with type T, find any fn call that COULD have produced this value". That would require significant changes to `generator_interior.rs`, and I would need mentorship on that. `@eholk` and I are discussing it.
3. `@estebank` do you know a way I can make the user-provided `reason` note pop out? right now it seems quite hidden
Also, I am not sure if we should run perf on this
r? `@nikomatsakis`
This also adjusts the lint docs generation to accept (and ignore) an allow
attribute, rather than expecting the documentation to be immediately followed by
the lint name.
Add linting on non_exhaustive structs and enum variants
Add ui tests for non_exhaustive reachable lint
Rename to non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns and avoid triggering on if let
Remove `Session.used_attrs` and move logic to `CheckAttrVisitor`
Instead of updating global state to mark attributes as used,
we now explicitly emit a warning when an attribute is used in
an unsupported position. As a side effect, we are to emit more
detailed warning messages (instead of just a generic "unused" message).
`Session.check_name` is removed, since its only purpose was to mark
the attribute as used. All of the callers are modified to use
`Attribute.has_name`
Additionally, `AttributeType::AssumedUsed` is removed - an 'assumed
used' attribute is implemented by simply not performing any checks
in `CheckAttrVisitor` for a particular attribute.
We no longer emit unused attribute warnings for the `#[rustc_dummy]`
attribute - it's an internal attribute used for tests, so it doesn't
mark sense to treat it as 'unused'.
With this commit, a large source of global untracked state is removed.
Instead of updating global state to mark attributes as used,
we now explicitly emit a warning when an attribute is used in
an unsupported position. As a side effect, we are to emit more
detailed warning messages (instead of just a generic "unused" message).
`Session.check_name` is removed, since its only purpose was to mark
the attribute as used. All of the callers are modified to use
`Attribute.has_name`
Additionally, `AttributeType::AssumedUsed` is removed - an 'assumed
used' attribute is implemented by simply not performing any checks
in `CheckAttrVisitor` for a particular attribute.
We no longer emit unused attribute warnings for the `#[rustc_dummy]`
attribute - it's an internal attribute used for tests, so it doesn't
mark sense to treat it as 'unused'.
With this commit, a large source of global untracked state is removed.
Lint against named asm labels
This adds a deny-by-default lint to prevent the use of named labels in inline `asm!`. Without a solution to #81088 about whether the compiler should rewrite named labels or a special syntax for labels, a lint against them should prevent users from writing assembly that could break for internal compiler reasons, such as inlining or anything else that could change the number of actual inline assembly blocks emitted.
This does **not** resolve the issue with rewriting labels, that still needs a decision if the compiler should do any more work to try to make them work.
Move naked function ABI check to its own lint
This check was previously categorized under the lint named
`UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`. That lint is future incompatible and will
be turned into an error in a future release. However, as defined in the
Constrained Naked Functions RFC, this check should only be a warning.
This is because it is possible for a naked function to be implemented in
such a way that it does not break even the undefined ABI. For example, a
`jmp` to a `const`.
Therefore, this patch defines a new lint named
`UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI` which contains just this single check.
Unlike `UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`, `UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI`
will not be converted to an error in the future.
rust-lang/rfcs#2774rust-lang/rfcs#2972
This check was previously categorized under the lint named
`UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`. That lint is future incompatible and will
be turned into an error in a future release. However, as defined in the
Constrained Naked Functions RFC, this check should only be a warning.
This is because it is possible for a naked function to be implemented in
such a way that it does not break even the undefined ABI. For example, a
`jmp` to a `const`.
Therefore, this patch defines a new lint named
`UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI` which contains just this single check.
Unlike `UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`, `UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI`
will not be converted to an error in the future.
rust-lang/rfcs#2774rust-lang/rfcs#2972
Allow labeled loops as value expressions for `break`
Fixes#86948. This is currently allowed:
```rust
return 'label: loop { break 'label 42; };
break ('label: loop { break 'label 42; });
break 1 + 'label: loop { break 'label 42; };
break 'outer 'inner: loop { break 'inner 42; };
```
But not this:
```rust
break 'label: loop { break 'label 42; };
```
I have fixed this, so that the above now parses as an unlabeled break with a labeled loop as its value expression.
rfc3052 followup: Remove authors field from Cargo manifests
Since RFC 3052 soft deprecated the authors field, hiding it from
crates.io, docs.rs, and making Cargo not add it by default, and it is
not generally up to date/useful information for contributors, we may as well
remove it from crates in this repo.
Since RFC 3052 soft deprecated the authors field anyway, hiding it from
crates.io, docs.rs, and making Cargo not add it by default, and it is
not generally up to date/useful information, we should remove it from
crates in this repo.
Currently, we parse macros at the end of a block
(e.g. `fn foo() { my_macro!() }`) as expressions, rather than
statements. This means that a macro invoked in this position
cannot expand to items or semicolon-terminated expressions.
In the future, we might want to start parsing these kinds of macros
as statements. This would make expansion more 'token-based'
(i.e. macro expansion behaves (almost) as if you just textually
replaced the macro invocation with its output). However,
this is a breaking change (see PR #78991), so it will require
further discussion.
Since the current behavior will not be changing any time soon,
we need to address the interaction with the
`SEMICOLON_IN_EXPRESSIONS_FROM_MACROS` lint. Since we are parsing
the result of macro expansion as an expression, we will emit a lint
if there's a trailing semicolon in the macro output. However, this
results in a somewhat confusing message for users, since it visually
looks like there should be no problem with having a semicolon
at the end of a block
(e.g. `fn foo() { my_macro!() }` => `fn foo() { produced_expr; }`)
To help reduce confusion, this commit adds a note explaining
that the macro is being interpreted as an expression. Additionally,
we suggest adding a semicolon after the macro *invocation* - this
will cause us to parse the macro call as a statement. We do *not*
use a structured suggestion for this, since the user may actually
want to remove the semicolon from the macro definition (allowing
the block to evaluate to the expression produced by the macro).
Warn on inert attributes used on bang macro invocation
These attributes are currently discarded.
This may change in the future (see #63221), but for now,
placing inert attributes on a macro invocation does nothing,
so we should warn users about it.
Technically, it's possible for there to be attribute macro
on the same macro invocation (or at a higher scope), which
inspects the inert attribute. For example:
```rust
#[look_for_inline_attr]
#[inline]
my_macro!()
#[look_for_nested_inline]
mod foo { #[inline] my_macro!() }
```
However, this would be a very strange thing to do.
Anyone running into this can manually suppress the warning.
These attributes are currently discarded.
This may change in the future (see #63221), but for now,
placing inert attributes on a macro invocation does nothing,
so we should warn users about it.
Technically, it's possible for there to be attribute macro
on the same macro invocation (or at a higher scope), which
inspects the inert attribute. For example:
```rust
#[look_for_inline_attr]
#[inline]
my_macro!()
#[look_for_nested_inline]
mod foo { #[inline] my_macro!() }
```
However, this would be a very strange thing to do.
Anyone running into this can manually suppress the warning.
When we need to emit a lint at a macro invocation, we currently use the
`NodeId` of its parent definition (e.g. the enclosing function). This
means that any `#[allow]` / `#[deny]` attributes placed 'closer' to the
macro (e.g. on an enclosing block or statement) will have no effect.
This commit computes a better `lint_node_id` in `InvocationCollector`.
When we visit/flat_map an AST node, we assign it a `NodeId` (earlier
than we normally would), and store than `NodeId` in current
`ExpansionData`. When we collect a macro invocation, the current
`lint_node_id` gets cloned along with our `ExpansionData`, allowing it
to be used if we need to emit a lint later on.
This improves the handling of `#[allow]` / `#[deny]` for
`SEMICOLON_IN_EXPRESSIONS_FROM_MACROS` and some `asm!`-related lints.
The 'legacy derive helpers' lint retains its current behavior
(I've inlined the now-removed `lint_node_id` function), since
there isn't an `ExpansionData` readily available.
It makes very little sense to maintain denylists of ABIs when, as far as
non-generic ABIs are concerned, targets usually only support a small
subset of the available ABIs.
This has historically been a cause of bugs such as us allowing use of
the platform-specific ABIs on x86 targets – these in turn would cause
LLVM errors or assertions to fire.
Fixes#57182
Sponsored by: standard.ai
Remove unused dependencies from compiler crates
Various compiler crates have dependencies that they don't appear to use. I used some scripting to detect such dependencies, filtered them based on some manual review, and removed those that do indeed appear to be entirely unused.
Turn non_fmt_panic into a future_incompatible edition lint.
This turns the `non_fmt_panic` lint into a future_incompatible edition lint, so it becomes part of the `rust_2021_compatibility` group. See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85894.
This lint produces both warnings about semantical changes (e.g. `panic!("{{")`) and things that will become hard errors (e.g. `panic!("{")`). So I added a `explain_reason: false` that supresses the default "this will become a hard error" or "the semantics will change" message, and instead added a note depending on the situation. (cc `@rylev)`
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Add `future_prelude_collision` lint
Implements #84594. (RFC rust-lang/rfcs#3114 ([rendered](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3114-prelude-2021.md))) Not entirely complete but wanted to have my progress decently available while I finish off the last little bits.
Things left to implement:
* [x] UI tests for lints
* [x] Only emit lint for 2015 and 2018 editions
* [ ] Lint name/message bikeshedding
* [x] Implement for `FromIterator` (from best I can tell, the current approach as mentioned from [this comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84594#issuecomment-847288288) won't work due to `FromIterator` instances not using dot-call syntax, but if I'm correct about this then that would also need to be fixed for `TryFrom`/`TryInto`)*
* [x] Add to `rust-2021-migration` group? (See #85512) (added to `rust-2021-compatibility` group)
* [ ] Link to edition guide in lint docs
*edit: looked into it, `lookup_method` will also not be hit for `TryFrom`/`TryInto` for non-dotcall syntax. If anyone who is more familiar with typecheck knows the equivalent for looking up associated functions, feel free to chime in.
Update BARE_TRAIT_OBJECT and ELLIPSIS_INCLUSIVE_RANGE_PATTERNS to errors in Rust 2021
This addresses https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/81244 by updating two lints to errors in the Rust 2021 edition.
r? `@estebank`
resolve: Partially unify early and late scope-relative identifier resolution
Reuse `early_resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope` instead of a chunk of code in `resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope` doing the same job.
`early_resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope`/`visit_scopes` had to be slightly extended to be able to 1) start from a specific module instead of the current parent scope and 2) report one deprecation lint.
`early_resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope` still doesn't support walking through "ribs", that part is left in `resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope` (moreover, I'm pretty sure it's buggy, but that's a separate issue, cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/52389 at least).
Now that future-incompat-report support has landed in nightly Cargo, we
can start to make progress towards removing the various proc-macro
back-compat hacks that have accumulated in the compiler.
This PR introduces a new lint `proc_macro_back_compat`, which results in
a future-incompat-report entry being generated. All proc-macro
back-compat warnings will be grouped under this lint. Note that this
lint will never actually become a hard error - instead, we will remove
the special cases for various macros, which will cause older versions of
those crates to emit some other error.
I've added code to fire this lint for the `time-macros-impl` case. This
is the easiest case out of all of our current back-compat hacks - the
crate was renamed to `time-macros`, so seeing a filename with
`time-macros-impl` guarantees that an older version of the parent `time`
crate is in use.
When Cargo's future-incompat-report feature gets stabilized, affected
users will start to see future-incompat warnings when they build their
crates.
Stabilize `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` lint
This makes it possible to override the level of the `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn`, as proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71668#issuecomment-729770896.
Tracking issue: #71668
r? ```@nikomatsakis``` cc ```@SimonSapin``` ```@RalfJung```
# Stabilization report
This is a stabilization report for `#![feature(unsafe_block_in_unsafe_fn)]`.
## Summary
Currently, the body of unsafe functions is an unsafe block, i.e. you can perform unsafe operations inside.
The `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` lint, stabilized here, can be used to change this behavior, so performing unsafe operations in unsafe functions requires an unsafe block.
For now, the lint is allow-by-default, which means that this PR does not change anything without overriding the lint level.
For more information, see [RFC 2585](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2585-unsafe-block-in-unsafe-fn.md)
### Example
```rust
// An `unsafe fn` for demonstration purposes.
// Calling this is an unsafe operation.
unsafe fn unsf() {}
// #[allow(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)] by default,
// the behavior of `unsafe fn` is unchanged
unsafe fn allowed() {
// Here, no `unsafe` block is needed to
// perform unsafe operations...
unsf();
// ...and any `unsafe` block is considered
// unused and is warned on by the compiler.
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
#[warn(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]
unsafe fn warned() {
// Removing this `unsafe` block will
// cause the compiler to emit a warning.
// (Also, no "unused unsafe" warning will be emitted here.)
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
#[deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]
unsafe fn denied() {
// Removing this `unsafe` block will
// cause a compilation error.
// (Also, no "unused unsafe" warning will be emitted here.)
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
```
- Move MISSING_CRATE_LEVEL_DOCS to rustdoc directly
- Update documentation
This also takes the opportunity to make the `no-crate-level-doc-lint`
test more specific.
- Rename `broken_intra_doc_links` to `rustdoc::broken_intra_doc_links`
- Ensure that the old lint names still work and give deprecation errors
- Register lints even when running doctests
Otherwise, all `rustdoc::` lints would be ignored.
- Register all existing lints as removed
This unfortunately doesn't work with `register_renamed` because tool
lints have not yet been registered when rustc is running. For similar
reasons, `check_backwards_compat` doesn't work either. Call
`register_removed` directly instead.
- Fix fallout
+ Rustdoc lints for compiler/
+ Rustdoc lints for library/
Note that this does *not* suggest `rustdoc::broken_intra_doc_links` for
`rustdoc::intra_doc_link_resolution_failure`, since there was no time
when the latter was valid.
This allows a build system to indicate a location in its own dependency
specification files (eg Cargo's `Cargo.toml`) which can be reported
along side any unused crate dependency.
This supports several types of location:
- 'json' - provide some json-structured data, which is included in the json diagnostics
in a `tool_metadata` field
- 'raw' - emit the provided string into the output. This also appears as a json string in
`tool_metadata`.
If no `--extern-location` is explicitly provided then a default json entry of the form
`"tool_metadata":{"name":<cratename>,"path":<cratepath>}` is emitted.
introduce future-compatibility warning for forbidden lint groups
We used to ignore `forbid(group)` scenarios completely. This changed in #78864, but that led to a number of regressions (#80988, #81218).
This PR introduces a future compatibility warning for the case where a group is forbidden but then an individual lint within that group is allowed. We now issue a FCW when we see the "allow", but permit it to take effect.
r? ``@Mark-Simulacrum``
We used to ignore `forbid(group)` scenarios completely. This changed
in #78864, but that led to a number of regressions (#80988, #81218).
This PR introduces a future compatibility warning for the case where
a group is forbidden but then an individual lint within that group
is allowed. We now issue a FCW when we see the "allow", but permit
it to take effect.
cc #79813
This PR adds an allow-by-default future-compatibility lint
`SEMICOLON_IN_EXPRESSIONS_FROM_MACROS`. It fires when a trailing semicolon in a
macro body is ignored due to the macro being used in expression
position:
```rust
macro_rules! foo {
() => {
true; // WARN
}
}
fn main() {
let val = match true {
true => false,
_ => foo!()
};
}
```
The lint takes its level from the macro call site, and
can be allowed for a particular macro by adding
`#[allow(semicolon_in_expressions_from_macros)]`.
The lint is set to warn for all internal rustc crates (when being built
by a stage1 compiler). After the next beta bump, we can enable
the lint for the bootstrap compiler as well.
It's not an internal lint:
- It's not in the rustc::internal lint group
- It's on unconditionally, because it actually lints `staged_api`, not
the compiler
This fixes a bug where `#[deny(rustc::internal)]` would warn that
`rustc::internal` was an unknown lint.
