expand: fix minor diagnostics bug
The error mentions `///`, when it's actually `//!`:
```
error[E0658]: attributes on expressions are experimental
--> test.rs:4:9
|
4 | //! wah
| ^^^^^^^
|
= note: see issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15701 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15701> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(stmt_expr_attributes)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= help: `///` is for documentation comments. For a plain comment, use `//`.
```
Some minor (English only) heroics are performed to print error messages
like "5th rule of macro `m` is never used". The form "rule #5 of macro
`m` is never used" is just as good and much simpler to implement.
Fix insufficient logic when searching for the underlying allocation
This PR fixes the logic inside the `invalid_reference_casting` lint, when trying to lint on bigger memory layout casts.
More specifically when looking for the "underlying allocation" we were wrongly assuming that when we got `&mut slice[index]` that `slice[index]` was the allocation, but it's not.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/124685
Couldn't find documentation supporting that single-variant
`#[repr(Rust)]` enums with RHS assigned work as expected with this
change.
```rust
enum Variants {
A = 17,
} // Would this be zero sized optimized guaranteed?
```
Disallow ambiguous attributes on expressions
This implements the suggestion in [#15701](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15701#issuecomment-2033124217) to disallow ambiguous outer attributes on expressions. This should resolve one of the concerns blocking the stabilization of `stmt_expr_attributes`.
Deny gen keyword in `edition_2024_compat` lints
Splits the `keyword_idents` lint into two -- `keyword_idents_2018` and `keyword_idents_2024` -- since each corresponds to a future-compat warning in a different edition. Group these together into a new `keyword_idents` lint group, and add the latter to the `rust_2024_compatibility` so that `gen` is ready for the 2024 edition.
cc `@traviscross` `@ehuss`
The error mentions `///`, when it's actually `//!`:
error[E0658]: attributes on expressions are experimental
--> test.rs:4:9
|
4 | //! wah
| ^^^^^^^
|
= note: see issue #15701 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15701> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(stmt_expr_attributes)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= help: `///` is for documentation comments. For a plain comment, use `//`.
Fix trait solver overflow with `non_local_definitions` lint
This PR fixes the trait solver overflow with the `non_local_definitions` lint reported in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123573 using the suggestion from `@lcnr:` https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123573#issuecomment-2041348320 to use the next trait solver.
~~I have not (yet) tried to create a minimized repro~~ ``@compiler-errors`` did the minimization (thanks you) but I have manually tested on the `starlark-rust` project that it fixes the issue.
Fixes#123573
r? `@lcnr`
Split `non_local_definitions` lint tests in separate test files
This PR splits the giant `non_local_definitions` lint UI test in separate test files.
This change is extracted from #123594 (where it was requested https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123594#discussion_r1555261772), to ease the review of the other PR and to reduce the size of the other PR.
r? ``@compiler-errors``
rename ptr::from_exposed_addr -> ptr::with_exposed_provenance
As discussed on [Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-opsem/topic/To.20expose.20or.20not.20to.20expose/near/427757066).
The old name, `from_exposed_addr`, makes little sense as it's not the address that is exposed, it's the provenance. (`ptr.expose_addr()` stays unchanged as we haven't found a better option yet. The intended interpretation is "expose the provenance and return the address".)
The new name nicely matches `ptr::without_provenance`.
Split an item bounds and an item's super predicates
This is the moral equivalent of #107614, but instead for predicates this applies to **item bounds**. This PR splits out the item bounds (i.e. *all* predicates that are assumed to hold for the alias) from the item *super predicates*, which are the subset of item bounds which share the same self type as the alias.
## Why?
Much like #107614, there are places in the compiler where we *only* care about super-predicates, and considering predicates that possibly don't have anything to do with the alias is problematic. This includes things like closure signature inference (which is at its core searching for `Self: Fn(..)` style bounds), but also lints like `#[must_use]`, error reporting for aliases, computing type outlives predicates.
Even in cases where considering all of the `item_bounds` doesn't lead to bugs, unnecessarily considering irrelevant bounds does lead to a regression (#121121) due to doing extra work in the solver.
## Example 1 - Trait Aliases
This is best explored via an example:
```
type TAIT<T> = impl TraitAlias<T>;
trait TraitAlias<T> = A + B where T: C;
```
The item bounds list for `Tait<T>` will include:
* `Tait<T>: A`
* `Tait<T>: B`
* `T: C`
While `item_super_predicates` query will include just the first two predicates.
Side-note: You may wonder why `T: C` is included in the item bounds for `TAIT`? This is because when we elaborate `TraitAlias<T>`, we will also elaborate all the predicates on the trait.
## Example 2 - Associated Type Bounds
```
type TAIT<T> = impl Iterator<Item: A>;
```
The `item_bounds` list for `TAIT<T>` will include:
* `Tait<T>: Iterator`
* `<Tait<T> as Iterator>::Item: A`
But the `item_super_predicates` will just include the first bound, since that's the only bound that is relevant to the *alias* itself.
## So what
This leads to some diagnostics duplication just like #107614, but none of it will be user-facing. We only see it in the UI test suite because we explicitly disable diagnostic deduplication.
Regarding naming, I went with `super_predicates` kind of arbitrarily; this can easily be changed, but I'd consider better names as long as we don't block this PR in perpetuity.
