finish `Reveal` removal
After #133212 changed the `TypingMode` to be the only source of truth, this entirely rips out `Reveal`.
cc #132279
r? `@compiler-errors`
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #132090 (Stop being so bail-y in candidate assembly)
- #132658 (Detect const in pattern with typo)
- #132911 (Pretty print async fn sugar in opaques and trait bounds)
- #133102 (aarch64 softfloat target: always pass floats in int registers)
- #133159 (Don't allow `-Zunstable-options` to take a value )
- #133208 (generate-copyright: Now generates a library file too.)
- #133215 (Fix missing submodule in `./x vendor`)
- #133264 (implement OsString::truncate)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #129838 (uefi: process: Add args support)
- #130800 (Mark `get_mut` and `set_position` in `std::io::Cursor` as const.)
- #132708 (Point at `const` definition when used instead of a binding in a `let` statement)
- #133226 (Make `PointerLike` opt-in instead of built-in)
- #133244 (Account for `wasm32v1-none` when exporting TLS symbols)
- #133257 (Add `UnordMap::clear` method)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Make `PointerLike` opt-in instead of built-in
The `PointerLike` trait currently is a built-in trait that computes the layout of the type. This is a bit problematic, because types implement this trait automatically. Since this can be broken due to semver-compatible changes to a type's layout, this is undesirable. Also, calling `layout_of` in the trait system also causes cycles.
This PR makes the trait implemented via regular impls, and adds additional validation on top to make sure that those impls are valid. This could eventually be `derive()`d for custom smart pointers, and we can trust *that* as a semver promise rather than risking library authors accidentally breaking it.
On the other hand, we may never expose `PointerLike`, but at least now the implementation doesn't invoke `layout_of` which could cause ICEs or cause cycles.
Right now for a `PointerLike` impl to be valid, it must be an ADT that is `repr(transparent)` and the non-1zst field needs to implement `PointerLike`. There are also some primitive impls for `&T`/ `&mut T`/`*const T`/`*mut T`/`Box<T>`.
Point at `const` definition when used instead of a binding in a `let` statement
Modify `PatKind::InlineConstant` to be `ExpandedConstant` standing in not only for inline `const` blocks but also for `const` items. This allows us to track named `const`s used in patterns when the pattern is a single binding. When we detect that there is a refutable pattern involving a `const` that could have been a binding instead, we point at the `const` item, and suggest renaming. We do this for both `let` bindings and `match` expressions missing a catch-all arm if there's at least one single binding pattern referenced.
After:
```
error[E0005]: refutable pattern in local binding
--> $DIR/bad-pattern.rs:19:13
|
LL | const PAT: u32 = 0;
| -------------- missing patterns are not covered because `PAT` is interpreted as a constant pattern, not a new variable
...
LL | let PAT = v1;
| ^^^ pattern `1_u32..=u32::MAX` not covered
|
= note: `let` bindings require an "irrefutable pattern", like a `struct` or an `enum` with only one variant
= note: for more information, visit https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch18-02-refutability.html
= note: the matched value is of type `u32`
help: introduce a variable instead
|
LL | let PAT_var = v1;
| ~~~~~~~
```
Before:
```
error[E0005]: refutable pattern in local binding
--> $DIR/bad-pattern.rs:19:13
|
LL | let PAT = v1;
| ^^^
| |
| pattern `1_u32..=u32::MAX` not covered
| missing patterns are not covered because `PAT` is interpreted as a constant pattern, not a new variable
| help: introduce a variable instead: `PAT_var`
|
= note: `let` bindings require an "irrefutable pattern", like a `struct` or an `enum` with only one variant
= note: for more information, visit https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch18-02-refutability.html
= note: the matched value is of type `u32`
```
CC #132582.
Reduce false positives of tail-expr-drop-order from consumed values (attempt #2)
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Tracked by #123739.
Related to #129864 but not replacing, yet.
Related to #130836.
This is an implementation of the approach suggested in the [Zulip stream](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/temporary.20drop.20order.20changes). A new MIR statement `BackwardsIncompatibleDrop` is added to the MIR syntax. The lint now works by inspecting possibly live move paths before at the `BackwardsIncompatibleDrop` location and the actual drop under the current edition, which should be one before Edition 2024 in practice.
take 2
open up coroutines
tweak the wordings
the lint works up until 2021
We were missing one case, for ADTs, which was
causing `Result` to yield incorrect results.
only include field spans with significant types
deduplicate and eliminate field spans
switch to emit spans to impl Drops
Co-authored-by: Niko Matsakis <nikomat@amazon.com>
collect drops instead of taking liveness diff
apply some suggestions and add explantory notes
small fix on the cache
let the query recurse through coroutine
new suggestion format with extracted variable name
fine-tune the drop span and messages
bugfix on runtime borrows
tweak message wording
filter out ecosystem types earlier
apply suggestions
clippy
check lint level at session level
further restrict applicability of the lint
translate bid into nop for stable mir
detect cycle in type structure
lints_that_dont_need_to_run: never skip future-compat-reported lints
Follow-up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125116: future-compat lints show up with `--json=future-incompat` even if they are otherwise allowed in the crate. So let's ensure we do not skip those as part of the `lints_that_dont_need_to_run` logic.
I could not find a current future compat lint that is emitted by a lint pass, so there's no clear way to add a test for this.
Cc `@blyxyas` `@cjgillot`
Rollup of 4 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #131081 (Use `ConstArgKind::Path` for all single-segment paths, not just params under `min_generic_const_args`)
- #132577 (Report the `unexpected_cfgs` lint in external macros)
- #133023 (Merge `-Zhir-stats` into `-Zinput-stats`)
- #133200 (ignore an occasionally-failing test in Miri)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Use `ConstArgKind::Path` for all single-segment paths, not just params under `min_generic_const_args`
r? `@BoxyUwU`
edit by `@BoxyUwU:`
This PR introduces a `min_generic_const_args` feature gate and implements some preliminary work for it, representing all const arguments that are single segment paths as `ConstArg::Path` instead of only those that resolve to a const generic parameter. There are a few bits of follow up work after this lands:
- Figure out how to represent `Foo<{ STATIC }>`
- Figure out how to evaluate `Foo<{ EnumVariantConstructor }>`
- Make param env normalization handle non-anon-consts
- Move `try_from_lit` and `from_anon_const` to hir ty lowering too
Improve VecCache under parallel frontend
This replaces the single Vec allocation with a series of progressively larger buckets. With the cfg for parallel enabled but with -Zthreads=1, this looks like a slight regression in i-count and cycle counts (~1%).
With the parallel frontend at -Zthreads=4, this is an improvement (-5% wall-time from 5.788 to 5.4688 on libcore) than our current Lock-based approach, likely due to reducing the bouncing of the cache line holding the lock. At -Zthreads=32 it's a huge improvement (-46%: 8.829 -> 4.7319 seconds).
try-job: i686-gnu-nopt
try-job: dist-x86_64-linux
Use `TypingMode` throughout the compiler instead of `ParamEnv`
Hopefully the biggest single PR as part of https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/issues/128.
## `infcx.typing_env` while defining opaque types
I don't know how'll be able to correctly handle opaque types when using something taking a `TypingEnv` while defining opaque types. To correctly handle the opaques we need to be able to pass in the current `opaque_type_storage` and return constraints, i.e. we need to use a proper canonical query. We should migrate all the queries used during HIR typeck and borrowck where this matters to proper canonical queries. This is
## `layout_of` and `Reveal::All`
We convert the `ParamEnv` to `Reveal::All` right at the start of the `layout_of` query, so I've changed callers of `layout_of` to already use a post analysis `TypingEnv` when encountering it.
ca87b535a0/compiler/rustc_ty_utils/src/layout.rs (L51)
## `Ty::is_[unpin|sized|whatever]`
I haven't migrated `fn is_item_raw` to use `TypingEnv`, will do so in a followup PR, this should significantly reduce the amount of `typing_env.param_env`. At some point there will probably be zero such uses as using the type system while ignoring the `typing_mode` is incorrect.
## `MirPhase` and phase-transitions
When inside of a MIR-body, we can mostly use its `MirPhase` to figure out the right `typing_mode`. This does not work during phase transitions, most notably when transitioning from `Analysis` to `Runtime`:
dae7ac133b/compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/lib.rs (L606-L625)
All these passes still run with `MirPhase::Analysis`, but we should only use `Reveal::All` once we're run the `RevealAll` pass. This required me to manually construct the right `TypingEnv` in all these passes. Given that it feels somewhat easy to accidentally miss this going forward, I would maybe like to change `Body::phase` to an `Option` and replace it at the start of phase transitions. This then makes it clear that the MIR is currently in a weird state.
r? `@ghost`
stability: remove skip_stability_check_due_to_privacy
This was added in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/38689 to deal with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/38412. However, even after removing the check, the relevant tests still pass. Let's see if CI finds any other tests that rely on this. If not, it seems like logic elsewhere in the compiler changed so this is not required any more.
the behavior of the type system not only depends on the current
assumptions, but also the currentnphase of the compiler. This is
mostly necessary as we need to decide whether and how to reveal
opaque types. We track this via the `TypingMode`.
