Remove the `ty` field from type system `Const`s
Fixes#125556Fixes#122908
Part of the work on `adt_const_params`/`generic_const_param_types`/`min_generic_const_exprs`/generally making the compiler nicer. cc rust-lang/project-const-generics#44
Please review commit-by-commit otherwise I wasted a lot of time not just squashing this into a giant mess (and also it'll be SO much nicer because theres a lot of fluff changes mixed in with other more careful changes if looking via File Changes
---
Why do this?
- The `ty` field keeps causing ICEs and weird behaviour due to it either being treated as "part of the const" or it being forgotten about leading to ICEs.
- As we move forward with `adt_const_params` and a potential `min_generic_const_exprs` it's going to become more complex to actually lower the correct `Ty<'tcx>`
- It muddles the idea behind how we check `Const` arguments have the correct type. By having the `ty` field it may seem like we ought to be relating it when we relate two types, or that its generally important information about the `Const`.
- Brings the compiler more in line with `a-mir-formality` as that also tracks the type of type system `Const`s via `ConstArgHasType` bounds in the env instead of on the `Const` itself.
- A lot of stuff is a lot nicer when you dont have to pass around the type of a const lol. Everywhere we construct `Const` is now significantly nicer 😅
See #125671's description for some more information about the `ty` field
---
General summary of changes in this PR:
- Add `Ty` to `ConstKind::Value` as otherwise there is no way to implement `ConstArgHasType` to ensure that const arguments are correctly typed for the parameter when we stop creating anon consts for all const args. It's also just incredibly difficult/annoying to thread the correct `Ty` around to a bunch of ctfe functions otherwise.
- Fully implement `ConstArgHasType` in both the old and new solver. Since it now has no reliance on the `ty` field it serves its originally intended purpose of being able to act as a double check that trait vs impls have correctly typed const parameters. It also will now be able to be responsible for checking types of const arguments to parameters under `min_generic_const_exprs`.
- Add `Ty` to `mir::Const::Ty`. I dont have a great understanding of why mir constants are setup like this to be honest. Regardless they need to be able to determine the type of the const and the easiest way to make this happen was to simply store the `Ty` along side the `ty::Const`. Maybe we can do better here in the future but I'd have to spend way more time looking at everywhere we use `mir::Const`.
- rustdoc has its own `Const` which also has a `ty` field. It was relatively easy to remove this.
---
r? `@lcnr` `@compiler-errors`
When `derive`ing, account for HRTB on `BareFn` fields
When given
```rust
trait SomeTrait {
type SomeType<'a>;
}
#[derive(Clone)]
struct Foo<T: SomeTrait> {
x: for<'a> fn(T::SomeType<'a>)
}
```
expand to
```rust
impl<T: ::core::clone::Clone + SomeTrait> ::core::clone::Clone for Foo<T>
where for<'a> T::SomeType<'a>: ::core::clone::Clone {
#[inline]
fn clone(&self) -> Foo<T> {
Foo { x: ::core::clone::Clone::clone(&self.x) }
}
}
```
instead of the previous invalid
```
impl<T: ::core::clone::Clone + SomeTrait> ::core::clone::Clone for Foo<T>
where T::SomeType<'a>: ::core::clone::Clone {
#[inline]
fn clone(&self) -> Foo<T> {
Foo { x: ::core::clone::Clone::clone(&self.x) }
}
}
```
Fix#122622.
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
Match ergonomics 2024: align implementation with RFC
- Remove eat-two-layers (`ref_pat_everywhere`)
- Consolidate `mut_preserve_binding_mode_2024` into `ref_pat_eat_one_layer_2024`
- `&mut` no longer peels off `&`
- Apply "no `ref mut` behind `&`" rule on all editions with `ref_pat_eat_one_layer_2024`
- Require `mut_ref` feature gate for all mutable by-reference bindings
r? ``@Nadrieril``
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123076
``@rustbot`` label A-edition-2024 A-patterns
Don't walk the bodies of free constants for reachability.
follow-up to #122371
cc #119214
This avoids codegening items (e.g. functions) that are only used during const eval, but do not reach their final constant value (e.g. via function pointers).
r? `@tmiasko`
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #124840 (resolve: mark it undetermined if single import is not has any bindings)
- #125622 (Winnow private method candidates instead of assuming any candidate of the right name will apply)
- #125648 (Remove unused(?) `~/rustsrc` folder from docker script)
- #125672 (Add more ABI test cases to miri (RFC 3391))
- #125800 (Fix `mut` static task queue in SGX target)
- #125871 (Orphanck[old solver]: Consider opaque types to never cover type parameters)
- #125893 (Handle all GVN binops in a single place.)
- #126008 (Port `tests/run-make-fulldeps/issue-19371` to ui-fulldeps)
- #126032 (Update description of the `IsTerminal` example)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Handle all GVN binops in a single place.
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
Addresses https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125359/files#r1608185319
r? ``@oli-obk``
Orphanck[old solver]: Consider opaque types to never cover type parameters
This fixes an oversight of mine in #117164. The change itself has already been FCP'ed.
This only affects the old solver, the next solver already correctly rejects the added test since #117164.
r? ``@lcnr``
set `has_unconstrained_ty_var` when generalizing aliases in bivariant contexts
this previously prevented the `regression-31157` benchmark from building
r? `@compiler-errors`
coverage: Carve out hole spans in a separate early pass
When extracting spans from MIR for use in coverage instrumentation, we sometimes need to identify *hole spans* (currently just closures), and carve up the other spans so that they don't overlap with holes.
This PR simplifies the main coverage-span-refiner by extracting the hole-carving process into a separate early pass. That pass produces a series of independent buckets, and we run the span-refiner on each bucket separately.
There is almost no difference in the resulting mappings, other than in some edge cases involving macros.
Winnow private method candidates instead of assuming any candidate of the right name will apply
partially reverts https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/60721
My original motivation was just to avoid the `delay_span_bug` (by attempting to thread the `ErrorGuaranteed` through to here). But then I realized that the error message is wrong. It refers to the `Foo<A>::foo` instead of `Foo<B>::foo`. This is almost invisible, because both functions are the same, but on different lines, so `-Zui-testing` makes it so the test is the same no matter which of these two functions is referenced.
But there's a much more obvious bug: If `Foo<B>` does not have a `foo` method at all, but `Foo<A>` has a private `foo` method, then we'll refer to that one. This has now been fixed, and we report a normal `method not found` error.
The way this is done is by creating a list of all possible private functions (just like we create a list of the public functions that can actually be called), and then winnowing it by analyzing where bounds and `Self` types to see if any of the found methods can actually apply (again, just like with the list of public functions).
I wonder if there is room for doing the same thing with unstable functions instead of running all of method resolution twice.
r? ``@compiler-errors`` for method resolution stuff
resolve: mark it undetermined if single import is not has any bindings
- Fixes#124490
- Fixes#125013
This issue arises from incorrect resolution updates, for example:
```rust
mod a {
pub mod b {
pub mod c {}
}
}
use a::*;
use b::c;
use c as b;
fn main() {}
```
1. In the first loop, binding `(root, b)` is refer to `root:🅰️:b` due to `use a::*`.
1. However, binding `(root, c)` isn't defined by `use b::c` during this stage because `use c as b` falls under the `single_imports` of `(root, b)`, where the `imported_module` hasn't been computed yet. This results in marking the `path_res` for `b` as `Indeterminate`.
2. Then, the `imported_module` for `use c as b` will be recorded.
2. In the second loop, `use b::c` will be processed again:
1. Firstly, it attempts to find the `path_res` for `(root, b)`.
2. It will iterate through the `single_imports` of `use b::c`, encounter `use c as b`, attempt to resolve `c` in `root`, and ultimately return `Err(Undetermined)`, thus passing the iterator.
3. Use the binding `(root, b)` -> `root:🅰️:b` introduced by `use a::*` and ultimately return `root:🅰️:b` as the `path_res` of `b`.
4. Then define the binding `(root, c)` -> `root:🅰️🅱️:c`.
3. Then process `use c as b`, update the resolution for `(root, b)` to refer to `root:🅰️🅱️:c`, ultimately causing inconsistency.
In my view, step `2.2` has an issue where it should exit early, similar to the behavior when there's no `imported_module`. Therefore, I've added an attribute called `indeterminate` to `ImportData`. This will help us handle only those single imports that have at least one determined binding.
r? ``@petrochenkov``
rustc_codegen_ssa: fix `get_rpath_relative_to_output` panic when lib only contains file name
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
When compiles program with `-C rpath=yes` but with no output filename specified, or with filename ONLY, we will get an ICE for now. Fix it by treat empty `output` path in `get_rpath_relative_to_output` as current dir.
Before this patch:
```bash
rustc -C prefer_dynamic=yes -C rpath=yes -O h.rs # ICE, no output filename specified
rustc -o hello -C prefer_dynamic=yes -C rpath=yes -O h.rs # ICE, output filename has no path
rustc -o ./hello -C prefer_dynamic=yes -C rpath=yes -O h.rs # Works
```
All those examples work after the patch.
Close#119571.
Close#125785.
Various `HirTyLowerer` cleanups
Previously there was some ad-hoc specialization going on, because you could call `allows_infer`, which basically was deciding between whether the trait object was backed by `FnCtxt` or by `ItemCtxt`. I moved all the different logic into dedicated methods on `HirTyLowerer` and removed `allows_infer`
best reviewed commit-by-commit
Add intra-doc-links to rustc_middle crate-level docs.
Makes it slightly faster to find these modules, as you don't need to hunt for them in the big list.
Detect when user is trying to create a lending `Iterator` and give a custom explanation
The scope for this diagnostic is to detect lending iterators specifically and it's main goal is to help beginners to understand that what they are trying to implement might not be possible for `Iterator` trait specifically.
I ended up to changing the wording from originally proposed in the ticket because it might be misleading otherwise: `Data` might have a lifetime parameter but it can be unrelated to items user is planning to return.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/125337
`rustc --explain E0582` additional example
## Context
*From #124744*
Expands the example for E0582, an error ensuring that lifetime in a function's return type is sufficiently constrained (e.g. actually tied to some input type), to show an additional example where one sees the lifetime occurring syntactically among the relevant function input types, but is nonetheless rejected by rustc because a syntactic occurrence is not always sufficient.
`ct_infer` and `lower_ty` will correctly result in an error constant or type respectively, as they go through a `HirTyLowerer` method (just like `HirTyLowerer::allow_infer` is a method implemented by both implementors
