As described here UseOdrIndicator should be disabled on Windows
since link.exe does not support duplicate weak definitions
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D137227).
Co-Authored-By: Bastian Kersting <bkersting@google.com>
[rustdoc] Fix duplicated footnote IDs
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131901.
Footnote IDs were increased locally (ie, on the docblock) and not globally (ie, on the whole item page).
cc `@aDotInTheVoid`
r? `@notriddle`
compiletest: Add ``exact-llvm-major-version`` directive
Now contributors don't need to use `min-llvm-version: X` + `ignore-llvm-version: X+1 - 99`, so they can simply use `exact-llvm-major-version: X`
To be honest, I didn't find any usages of that hack other than the one mentioned in the issue. ( `tests/codegen/try_question_mark_nop.rs`)
Closes#132348.
rustc-dev-guide PR for `//@ exact-llvm-major-version`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/pull/2135
r? jieyouxu
rustdoc: Treat declarative macros more like other item kinds
Apparently at some time in the past we were unable to generate an href for the module path inside the visibility of decl macros 2.0 (`pub(in ...)`). As a result of this, a whole separate function was introduced specifically for printing the visibility of decl macros that didn't attempt to generate any links. The description of PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/84074 states:
> This fixes the overly-complex invariant mentioned in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83237#issuecomment-815346570, where the macro source can't have any links in it only because the cache hasn't been populated yet.
I can no longer reproduce the original issue. Reusing the existing visibility rendering logic *seems* to work just fine (I couldn't come up with any counterexamples, though I invite you to prove me wrong).
* Fixes#83000
* Fixes the visibility showing up "twice" in rustdoc-JSON output: Once as the `visibility` field, once baked into the source[^1]
* Fixes `#[doc(hidden)]` not getting rendered on doc(hidden) decl macros 2.0 under `--document-hiden-items` (for decl macros 1.2 the issue remains; I will address this separately when fixing #132304).
---
<details><summary>Outdated Section</summary>
NOTE: The current version of this PR is committing a UI crime, I'd like to receive feedback on that. Maybe you have a satisfactory solution for how to remedy it. Namely, as you know we have two different ways of / modes for highlighting code with color:
1. Only highlighting links / item paths and avoiding to highlight tokens by kind like keywords (to reduce visual noise and maybe also artifact size). Used for item declarations(\*).
2. Highlighting tokens by kind. Used for code blocks written by the user.
(\*): With the notable exception being macro declarations! Well, since this PR reuses the same function for rendering the item visibility (which only makes sense), we have a clash of modes: We now use both ways of highlighting code for decl macros: №1 for the visibility, №2 for the rest. This awkward. See for yourself:
* On master: 
* On this branch: 
</details>
Furthermore, we now no longer syntax-highlight declarative macros (be it `macro_rules!` or `macro`) since that was inconsistent with the way we render all other item kinds. See (collapsed) *Outdated Section* above. See also https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132302#discussion_r1821310783.
| On master | On this branch |
|---|---|
|  |  |
[^1]: E.g., `"visibility":{"restricted":{"parent":1,"path":"::a"}},/*OMITTED*/,"inner":{"macro":"pub(in a) macro by_example_vis_named($foo:expr) {\n ...\n}"}`
The internal `btree::Recover` trait acted as a private API between
`BTreeSet` and `BTreeMap`, but we can use `pub(_)` restrictions these
days, and some of the methods don't need special handling anymore.
* `BTreeSet::get` can use `BTreeMap::get_key_value`
* `BTreeSet::take` can use `BTreeMap::remove_entry`
* `BTreeSet::replace` does need help, but this now uses a `pub(super)`
method on `BTreeMap` instead of the trait.
* `btree::Recover` is now removed.
this test was included for demonstrative and discussion purposes but does not test what its name alleges - in fact it does not test much of value at all!
as mentioned in this comment, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/122770#issuecomment-2474256965 , writing a correct test for this codegen outcome is difficult (partially because the public interface to std::fmt intentionally includes an #[inline(never)] function!), so to test this correctly will require more than i can offer in 122770.
PR 130999 added the file_lock feature, but libc does not define
flock() for the Solaris platform leading to a compilation error.
Additionally, I went through all the Tier 2 platforms and read through
their documentation to see whether flock was implemented. This turned up
5 more Unix platforms where flock is not supported, even though it may
exist in the libc crate.
[perf] rustdoc: Perform less work when cleaning middle::ty parenthesized generic args
CC #132697. I presume the perf regression it caused (if real) boils down to query invocation overhead, namely of `def_kind` & `trait_def` as we don't seem to be decoding more often from the crate metadata.
I won't try the obvious and reduce the amount of query calls by threading information via params as that would render the code awkward.
So instead I'm simply trying to attack some low-hanging fruits in the vicinity.
---
Previously, we would `clean_middle_generic_args` *unconditionally* inside `clean_middle_generic_args_with_constraints` even though we didn't actually use its result for parenthesized generic args (`Trait(...) -> ...`).
Now, we only call `clean_middle_generic_args` when necessary. Lastly, I've simplified `clean_middle_generic_args_with_constraints`.
---
r? ghost
pipe2 allows the newly-created pipe to atomically be CLOEXEC.
pipe2 was added to illumos a long time ago:
5dbfd19ad5.
I've verified that this change passes all tests.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/10118
This lint checks `map_or` method calls to check if they can be
consolidated down to something simpler and/or more readable.
For example, the code
```rs
let x = Some(5);
x.map_or(false, |n| n == 5)
```
can be rewritten as
```rs
let x = Some(5);
x == Some(5)
```
In addition, when the closure is more complex, the code can be altered
from, say,
```rs
let x = Ok::<Vec<i32>, i32>(vec![5]);
x.map_or(false, |n| n == [5])
```
into
```rs
let x = Ok::<Vec<i32>, i32>(vec![5]);
x.is_some_and(|n| n == [5])
```
This lint also considers cases where the `map_or` can be chained with
other method calls, and accommodates accordingly by adding extra
parentheses as needed to the suggestion.
changelog: add new lint `unnecessary_map_or`
