Tracking issue template: fine-grained information on style update status
Inspired by some of the communication issues around the stabilization of
`let`-chains, give more fine-grained information about the status of
updating style for any new syntax.
This does not change the process or blockers in any way; it only
*documents* the current state in the tracking issue. For instance, in
the case of `let`-chains, we would have checked the boxes for "Style
team decision" and "(non-blocking) Formatting has been implemented", and
not checked the box for the style guide. That would have then provided
better supporting information for any decisions.
rustdoc: Enable Markdown extensions when looking for doctests
Fixes#139064.
We should enable these to avoid misinterpreting uses of the extended
syntax as code blocks. This happens in practice with multi-paragraph
footnotes, as discovered in #139064.
emit a better error message for using the macro incorrectly
fixing: https://github.com/EnzymeAD/rust/issues/185
I feel like it's not a perfect message either, so I'm open to suggestions.
But at the end of the day users will need to read the docs anyway, and emitting
multi-line errors each time this gets triggered can probably become annoying?
r? ``@jieyouxu`` since you've reviewed my frontend work back in the days.
Tracking:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/124509
compiletest: Trim whitespace from environment variable names
When a test contains a directive like `//@ exec-env: FOO=bar`, compiletest currently includes that leading space in the name of the environment variable, so it is defined as ` FOO` instead of `FOO`.
This is an annoying footgun that is pretty much never intended, especially since most other directives *do* trim whitespace. So let's get rid of it by trimming the environment variable name.
Values remain untrimmed, since there could conceivably be a use-case for values with leading space, but perhaps we'll end up trimming values too in the future.
Recently observed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138603#issuecomment-2783709359.
Fixes#132990.
Supersedes #133148.
---
try-job: test-various
match ergonomics: replace `peel_off_references` with a recursive call
This makes it imo quite a bit easier to follow how the binding mode gets calculated.
cc ```@dianne```
Suppress missing field error when autoderef bottoms out in infer
I see this error repeatedly when doing refactorings, and it's pretty misleading b/c it's not the source of the error.
Small code improvement in rustdoc hidden stripper
This is a very minor code improvement following https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/137534. It doesn't change anything about the performance issue.
r? ```@notriddle```
The `//@ needs-crate-type: $crate_types...` directive takes a
comma-separated list of crate types that the target platform must
support in order for the test to be run.
Note that some of the output is currently bogus, with missing params and
args:
```
fn add(: _, : _) -> _ { m::add(, ) }
```
The next commit will fix this.
Rigidly project missing item due to guaranteed impossible sized predicate
This is a somewhat involved change, but it amounts to treating missing impl items due to guaranteed impossible where clauses (dyn/str/slice sized, cc #135480) as *rigid projections* rather than projecting to an error term, since that was preventing either reporting a proper error (in an empty param env) *or* successfully type checking the code (in the presence of trivially false where clauses).
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138970
r? `@lcnr` `@oli-obk`
It bugs me when variables of type `Ident` are called `name`. It leads to
silly things like `name.name`. `Ident` variables should be called
`ident`, and `name` should be used for variables of type `Symbol`.
This commit improves things by by doing `s/name/ident/` on a bunch of
`Ident` variables. Not all of them, but a decent chunk.
Inspired by some of the communication issues around the stabilization of
`let`-chains, give more fine-grained information about the status of
updating style for any new syntax.
This does not change the process or blockers in any way; it only
*documents* the current state in the tracking issue. For instance, in
the case of `let`-chains, we would have checked the boxes for "Style
team decision" and "(non-blocking) Formatting has been implemented", and
not checked the box for the style guide. That would have then provided
better supporting information for any decisions.
report call site of inlined scopes for large assignment lints
Addressed issue: #121672
Tracking issue: #83518
r? `@oli-obk`
I tried to follow your comment about what to do [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121672#issuecomment-1972783675). However, I'm totally unfamiliar with the code so far (this is my first contribution touching compiler code), so I apologize in advance if I did something stupid 😅
In particular, I'm not sure I use the _correct_ source scope to look for inline data, as there is a whole `IndexVec` of them. My changes definitely did something, as can be seen by the added ui test. However, the result is not as anticipated in the issue:
```
LL | let cell = std::cell::UnsafeCell::new(data);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ value moved from here
```
instead of
```
LL | let cell = std::cell::UnsafeCell::new(data);
| ^^^^ value moved from here
```
raising my suspicion that maybe I got the wrong source scope.
Update `u8`-to-and-from-`i8` suggestions.
`u8::cast_signed` and `i8::cast_unsigned` have been stabilised, but `i8::from_ne_bytes` et al. still suggest using `as i8` or `as u8`.
Report higher-ranked trait error when higher-ranked projection goal fails in new solver
~~See HACK comment inline. Not actually sure if it should be marked as a *HACK*, b/c~~ it's kinda a legitimate case we want to care about unless we're going to make the proof tree visitor *smarter* about the leak check than the actual trait solver itself.
Encountered this while battling with `NiceRegionError`s in the old solver b/c I wondered what this code ended up giving us in the *new* solver as a comparison:
```rust
trait Foo {}
impl<T: FnOnce(&())> Foo for T {}
fn baz<T: Foo>() {}
fn main() {
baz::<fn(&'static ())>();
}
```
On master it's pretty bad:
```
error[E0271]: type mismatch resolving `<fn(&()) as FnOnce<(&(),)>>::Output == ()`
--> <source>:8:11
|
8 | baz::<fn(&'static ())>();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ types differ
|
note: required for `fn(&'static ())` to implement `Foo`
--> <source>:3:22
|
3 | impl<T: FnOnce(&())> Foo for T {}
| ----------- ^^^ ^
| |
| unsatisfied trait bound introduced here
```
After this PR it's much better:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `fn(&'static ()): Foo` is not satisfied
--> /home/mgx/test.rs:8:11
|
8 | baz::<fn(&'static ())>();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the trait `for<'a> FnOnce(&'a ())` is not implemented for `fn(&'static ())`
|
= note: expected a closure with arguments `(&'static (),)`
found a closure with arguments `(&(),)`
note: required for `fn(&'static ())` to implement `Foo`
--> /home/mgx/test.rs:3:22
|
3 | impl<T: FnOnce(&())> Foo for T {}
| ----------- ^^^ ^
| |
| unsatisfied trait bound introduced here
note: required by a bound in `baz`
--> /home/mgx/test.rs:5:11
|
5 | fn baz<T: Foo>() {}
| ^^^ required by this bound in `baz`
```
r? lcnr
