const-eval: make misalignment a hard error
It's been a future-incompat error (showing up in cargo's reports) since https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/104616, Rust 1.68, released in March. That should be long enough.
The question for the lang team is simply -- should we move ahead with this, making const-eval alignment failures a hard error? (It turns out some of them accidentally already were hard errors since #104616. But not all so this is still a breaking change. Crater found no regression.)
Detect ruby-style closure in parser
When parsing a closure without a body that is surrounded by a block, suggest moving the opening brace after the closure head.
Fix#116608.
On type error involving closure, avoid ICE
When we encounter a type error involving a closure, we try to typeck prior closure invocations to see if they influenced the current expected type. When trying to do so, ensure that the closure was defined in our current scope.
Fix#116658.
Improve check-cfg diagnostics
This PR tries to improve some of the diagnostics of check-cfg.
The main changes is the unexpected name or value being added to the main diagnostic:
```diff
- warning: unexpected `cfg` condition name
+ warning: unexpected `cfg` condition name: `widnows`
```
It also cherry-pick the better sensible logic for when we print the list of expected values when we have a matching value for a very similar name.
Address https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111072#discussion_r1356818100
r? `@petrochenkov`
When we encounter a type error involving a closure, we try to typeck
prior closure invocations to see if they influenced the current expected
type. When trying to do so, ensure that the closure was defined in our
current scope.
Fix#116658.
exhaustiveness: Rework constructor splitting
`SplitWildcard` was pretty opaque. I replaced it with a more legible abstraction: `ConstructorSet` represents the set of constructors for patterns of a given type. This clarifies responsibilities: `ConstructorSet` handles one clear task, and diagnostic-related shenanigans can be done separately.
I'm quite excited, I had has this in mind for years but could never quite introduce it. This opens up possibilities, including type-specific optimisations (like using a `FxHashSet` to collect enum variants, which had been [hackily attempted some years ago](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/76918)), my one-pass rewrite (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116042), and future librarification.
Handle several `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes correctly
This PR fixes an issues where rustc would ignore subsequent `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes. The [corresponding RFC](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3368-diagnostic-attribute-namespace.html) specifies that the first matching instance of each option is used. Invalid attributes are linted and otherwise ignored.
Use structured suggestion for #113174
When encountering a for loop that is rejected by the borrow checker because it is being advanced within its body, provide a structured suggestion for `while let Some(pat) = iter.next()`.
This PR fixes an issues where rustc would ignore subsequent
`#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes. The [corresponding
RFC](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3368-diagnostic-attribute-namespace.html)
specifies that the first matching instance of each option is used.
Invalid attributes are linted and otherwise ignored.
When encountering a for loop that is rejected by the borrow checker
because it is being advanced within its body, provide a structured
suggestion for `while let Some(pat) = iter.next()`.
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``
Implement `-Clink-self-contained=-linker` opt out
This implements the `-Clink-self-contained` opt out necessary to switch to lld by changing rustc's defaults instead of cargo's.
Components that are enabled and disabled on the CLI are recorded, for the purpose of being merged with the ones which the target spec will declare (I'll open another PR for that tomorrow, for easier review).
For MCP510, we now check whether using the self-contained linker is disabled on the CLI. Right now it would only be sensible to with `-Zgcc-ld=lld` (and I'll add some checks that we don't both enable and disable a component on the CLI in a future PR), but the goal is to simplify adding the check of the target's enabled components here in the follow-up PRs.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Fix overflow checking in range patterns
When a range pattern contains an overflowing literal, if we're not careful we might not notice the overflow and use the wrapped value. This makes for confusing error messages because linting against overflowing literals is only done in a later pass. So when a range is invalid we check for overflows to provide a better error.
This check didn't use to handle negative types; this PR fixes that. First commit adds tests, second cleans up without changing behavior, third does the fix.
EDIT: while I was at it, I fixed a small annoyance about the span of the overflow lint on negated literals.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/94239
On type error of closure call argument, point at earlier calls that affected inference
Mitigate part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71209.
When we encounter a type error on a specific argument of a closure call argument, where the closure's definition doesn't have a type specified, look for other calls of the closure to try and find the specific call that cased that argument to be inferred of the expected type.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/unboxed-closures-type-mismatch.rs:30:18
|
LL | identity(1u16);
| -------- ^^^^ expected `u8`, found `u16`
| |
| arguments to this function are incorrect
|
note: expected because the closure was earlier called with an argument of type `u8`
--> $DIR/unboxed-closures-type-mismatch.rs:29:18
|
LL | identity(1u8);
| -------- ^^^ expected because this argument is of type `u8`
| |
| in this closure call
note: closure parameter defined here
--> $DIR/unboxed-closures-type-mismatch.rs:28:25
|
LL | let identity = |x| x;
| ^
help: change the type of the numeric literal from `u16` to `u8`
|
LL | identity(1u8);
| ~~
```
Improve handling of assertion failures with very long conditions
It's not perfectly clear what the best behaviour is here, but I think this is an improvement.
r? `@matthewjasper`
cc `@m-ou-se`
The assertion in `assert-long-condition.rs` used to be fail like this, all on
one line:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18\n + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0', tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5
```
The `\n` and subsequent indent is because the condition is pretty-printed, and
the pretty-printer inserts a newline. Printing the newline in this way is
arguably reasonable given that the message appears within single quotes, which
is very similar to a string literal.
However, after the assertion printing improvements that were released in 1.73,
the assertion now fails like this:
```
thread 'main' panicked at tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5:
assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18\n + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0
```
Now that there are no single quotes around the pretty-printed condition, the
`\n` is quite strange.
This commit gets rid of the `\n`, by removing the `escape_debug` done on the
pretty-printed message. This results in the following:
```
thread 'main' panicked at tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5:
assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18
+ 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0
```
The overly-large indent is still strange, but that's a separate pretty-printing issue.
This change helps with #108341.
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.
Fix suggestion span involving wrongly placed generic arg on variant
Fixes#116473
The span computation was wrong. It went from the end of the variant to the end of the (wrongly placed) args. However, the variant lived in a different expansion and this resulted in a nonsensical span that overlaps with another and thereby leads to the ICE.
In the fix I've changed span computation to not be based on the location of the variant, but purely on the location of the args. I simply extend the start of the args span 2 positions to the left and that includes the `::` and that's all we need apparently.
This approach produces a correct span regardless of which macro/expansion the args reside in and where the variant is.
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
}
```
When the variant and the (wrongly placed) args are at separate
source locations such as being in different macos or one in a macro and
the other somwhere outside of it, the arg spans we computed spanned
the entire distance between such locations and were hence invalid.
.
