warning: this argument is a mutable reference, but not used mutably
--> compiler\rustc_session\src\config.rs:2013:16
|
2013 | early_dcx: &mut EarlyDiagCtxt,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: consider changing to: `&EarlyDiagCtxt`
|
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#needless_pass_by_ref_mut
warning: this argument is a mutable reference, but not used mutably
--> compiler\rustc_ast_passes\src\ast_validation.rs:1555:11
|
1555 | this: &mut AstValidator<'_>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: consider changing to: `&AstValidator<'_>`
|
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#needless_pass_by_ref_mut
warning: this argument is a mutable reference, but not used mutably
--> compiler\rustc_infer\src\infer\snapshot\fudge.rs:16:12
|
16 | table: &mut UnificationTable<'_, 'tcx, T>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: consider changing to: `&UnificationTable<'_, 'tcx, T>`
|
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#needless_pass_by_ref_mut
warning: this argument is a mutable reference, but not used mutably
--> compiler\rustc_expand\src\expand.rs:961:13
|
961 | parser: &mut Parser<'a>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: consider changing to: `&Parser<'a>`
|
= warning: changing this function will impact semver compatibility
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#needless_pass_by_ref_mut
AST validation: Improve handling of inherent impls nested within functions and anon consts
Minimal fix for issue #121607 extracted from PR #120698 for ease of backporting and since I'd like to improve PR #120698 in such a way that it makes AST validator truly robust against such sort of regressions (AST validator is generally *beyond* footgun-y atm). The current version of PR #120698 sort of does that already but there's still room for improvement.
Fixes#89342.
Fixes [after beta-backport] #121607.
Partially addresses #119924 (#120698 aims to fully fix it).
---
### Explainer
The last commit of PR #119505 regressed issue #121607.
Previously we would reject visibilities on associated items with `visibility_not_permitted` if we were in a trait (by checking the parameter `ctxt` of `visit_assoc_item` which was 100% accurate) or if we were in a trait impl (by checking a flag called `in_trait_impl` tracked in `AstValidator` which was/is only accurate if the visitor methods correctly updated it which isn't actually the case giving rise to the old open issue #89342).
In PR #119505, I moved even more state into the `AstValidator` by generalizing the flag `in_trait_impl` to `trait_or_trait_impl` to be able to report more precise diagnostics (modeling *Trait | TraitImpl*). However since we/I didn't update `trait_or_trait_impl` in all places to reflect reality (similar to us not updating `in_trait_impl` before), this lead to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121607#issuecomment-1963084636 getting wrongfully rejected. Since PR #119505 we reject visibilities if the “globally tracked” (wrt. to `AstValidator`) `outer_trait_or_trait_impl` is `Some`.
Crucially, when visiting an inherent impl, I never reset `outer_trait_or_trait_impl` back to `None` leading us to believe that `bar` in the stack [`trait Foo` > `fn foo` > `impl Bar` > `pub fn bar`] (from the MCVE) was an inherent associated item (we saw `trait Foo` but not `impl Bar` before it).
The old open issue #89342 is caused by the aforementioned issue of us never updating `in_trait_impl` prior to my PR #119505 / `outer_trait_or_trait` after my PR. Stack: [`impl Default for Foo` > `{` > `impl Foo` > `pub const X`] (we only saw `impl Default for Foo` but not the `impl Foo` before it).
---
This PR is only meant to be a *hot fix*. I plan on completely *rewriting* `AstValidator` from the ground up to not rely on “globally tracked” state like this or at least make it close to impossible to forget updating it when descending into nested items (etc.). Other visitors do a way better job at that (e.g. AST lowering). I actually plan on experimenting with moving more and more logic from `AstValidator` into the AST lowering pass/stage/visitor to follow the [Parse, don't validate](https://lexi-lambda.github.io/blog/2019/11/05/parse-don-t-validate/) “pattern”.
---
r? `@compiler-errors`
Existing names for values of this type are `sess`, `parse_sess`,
`parse_session`, and `ps`. `sess` is particularly annoying because
that's also used for `Session` values, which are often co-located, and
it can be difficult to know which type a value named `sess` refers to.
(That annoyance is the main motivation for this change.) `psess` is nice
and short, which is good for a name used this much.
The commit also renames some `parse_sess_created` values as
`psess_created`.
If we abort immediately after complaining about the obsolete `impl Trait
for ..` syntax, then we avoid reaching HIR lowering. This means we can
use `TyKind::Dummy` instead of `TyKind::Err`.
This makes it more like `hir::TyKind::Err`, and avoids a
`span_delayed_bug` call in `LoweringContext::lower_ty_direct`.
It also requires adding `ast::TyKind::Dummy`, now that
`ast::TyKind::Err` can't be used for that purpose in the absence of an
error emission.
There are a couple of cases that aren't as neat as I would have liked,
marked with `FIXME` comments.
Provide more suggestions on invalid equality where bounds
```
error: equality constraints are not yet supported in `where` clauses
--> $DIR/equality-bound.rs:50:9
|
LL | IntoIterator::Item = A
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ not supported
|
= note: see issue #20041 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/20041> for more information
help: if `IntoIterator::Item` is an associated type you're trying to set, use the associated type binding syntax
|
LL ~ fn from_iter<T: IntoIterator<Item = A>>(_: T) -> Self
LL ~
|
error: equality constraints are not yet supported in `where` clauses
--> $DIR/equality-bound.rs:63:9
|
LL | T::Item = A
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ not supported
|
= note: see issue #20041 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/20041> for more information
help: if `IntoIterator::Item` is an associated type you're trying to set, use the associated type binding syntax
|
LL ~ fn from_iter<T: IntoIterator<Item = A>>(_: T) -> Self
LL ~
|
```
Fix#68982.
```
error: equality constraints are not yet supported in `where` clauses
--> $DIR/equality-bound.rs:50:9
|
LL | IntoIterator::Item = A,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ not supported
|
= note: see issue #20041 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/20041> for more information
help: if `IntoIterator::Item` is an associated type you're trying to set, use the associated type binding syntax
|
LL ~ fn from_iter<T: IntoIterator<Item = A>>(_: T) -> Self
LL | where
LL ~
|
error: equality constraints are not yet supported in `where` clauses
--> $DIR/equality-bound.rs:63:9
|
LL | T::Item = A,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ not supported
|
= note: see issue #20041 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/20041> for more information
help: if `IntoIterator::Item` is an associated type you're trying to set, use the associated type binding syntax
|
LL ~ fn from_iter<T: IntoIterator<Item = A>>(_: T) -> Self
LL | where
LL ~
|
```
Fix#68982.
Refactor AST trait bound modifiers
Instead of having two types to represent trait bound modifiers in the parser / the AST (`parser::ty::BoundModifiers` & `ast::TraitBoundModifier`), only to map one to the other later, just use `parser::ty::BoundModifiers` (moved & renamed to `ast::TraitBoundModifiers`).
The struct type is more extensible and easier to deal with (see [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119099/files#r1430749981) and [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119099/files#r1430752116) for context) since it more closely models what it represents: A compound of two kinds of modifiers, constness and polarity. Modeling this as an enum (the now removed `ast::TraitBoundModifier`) meant one had to add a new variant per *combination* of modifier kind, which simply isn't scalable and which lead to a lot of explicit non-DRY matches.
NB: `hir::TraitBoundModifier` being an enum is fine since HIR doesn't need to worry representing invalid modifier kind combinations as those get rejected during AST validation thereby immensely cutting down the number of possibilities.
Properly reject `default` on free const items
Fixes#117791.
Technically speaking, this is a breaking change but I doubt it will lead to any real-world regressions (maybe in some macro-trickery crates?). Doing a crater run probably isn't worth it.
detects redundant imports that can be eliminated.
for #117772 :
In order to facilitate review and modification, split the checking code and
removing redundant imports code into two PR.
Deny more `~const` trait bounds
thereby fixing a family of ICEs (delayed bugs) for `feature(const_trait_impl, effects)` code.
As discussed
r? `@fee1-dead`
