Uplift some miscellaneous coroutine-specific machinery into `check_closure`
This PR uplifts some of the logic in `check_fn` that is specific to checking coroutines, which always flows through `check_closure`.
This is just some miscellaneous clean up that I've wanted to do, especially because I'm poking around this code to make it work for async closures.
Actually parse async gen blocks correctly
1. I got the control flow in `parse_expr_bottom` messed up, and obviously forgot a test for `async gen`, so we weren't actually ever parsing it correctly.
2. I forgot to gate the span for `async gen {}`, so even if we did parse it, we wouldn't have correctly denied it in `cfg(FALSE)`.
r? eholk
Implement `--env` compiler flag (without `tracked_env` support)
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80792.
Implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/653.
Not an implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2794.
It adds the `--env` compiler flag option which allows to set environment values used by `env!` and `option_env!`.
Important to note: When trying to retrieve an environment variable value, it will first look into the ones defined with `--env`, and if there isn't one, then only it will look into the environment variables. So if you use `--env PATH=a`, then `env!("PATH")` will return `"a"` and not the actual `PATH` value.
As mentioned in the title, `tracked_env` support is not added here. I'll do it in a follow-up PR.
r? rust-lang/compiler
never_patterns: Parse match arms with no body
Never patterns are meant to signal unreachable cases, and thus don't take bodies:
```rust
let ptr: *const Option<!> = ...;
match *ptr {
None => { foo(); }
Some(!),
}
```
This PR makes rustc accept the above, and enforces that an arm has a body xor is a never pattern. This affects parsing of match arms even with the feature off, so this is delicate. (Plus this is my first non-trivial change to the parser).
~~The last commit is optional; it introduces a bit of churn to allow the new suggestions to be machine-applicable. There may be a better solution? I'm not sure.~~ EDIT: I removed that commit
r? `@compiler-errors`
Resolve associated item bindings by namespace
This is the 3rd commit split off from #118360 with tests reblessed (they no longer contain duplicated diags which were caused by 4c0addc80a) & slightly adapted (removed supertraits from a UI test, cc #118040).
> * Resolve all assoc item bindings (type, const, fn (feature `return_type_notation`)) by namespace instead of trying to resolve a type first (in the non-RTN case) and falling back to consts afterwards. This is consistent with RTN. E.g., for `Tr<K = {…}>` we now always try to look up assoc consts (this extends to supertrait bounds). This gets rid of assoc tys shadowing assoc consts in assoc item bindings which is undesirable & inconsistent (types and consts live in different namespaces after all)
> * Consolidate the resolution of assoc {ty, const} bindings and RTN (dedup, better diags for RTN)
> * Fix assoc consts being labeled as assoc *types* in several diagnostics
> * Make a bunch of diagnostics translatable
Fixes#112560 (error → pass).
As discussed
r? `@compiler-errors`
---
**Addendum**: What I call “associated item bindings” are commonly referred to as “type bindings” for historical reasons. Nowadays, “type bindings” include assoc type bindings, assoc const bindings and RTN (return type notation) which is why I prefer not to use this outdated term.
Match usize/isize exhaustively with half-open ranges
The long-awaited finale to the saga of [exhaustiveness checking for integers](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/50912)!
```rust
match 0usize {
0.. => {} // exhaustive!
}
match 0usize {
0..usize::MAX => {} // helpful error message!
}
```
Features:
- Half-open ranges behave as expected for `usize`/`isize`;
- Trying to use `0..usize::MAX` will tell you that `usize::MAX..` is missing and explain why. No more unhelpful "`_` is missing";
- Everything else stays the same.
This should unblock https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/37854.
Review-wise:
- I recommend looking commit-by-commit;
- This regresses perf because of the added complexity in `IntRange`; hopefully not too much;
- I measured each `#[inline]`, they all help a bit with the perf regression (tho I don't get why);
- I did not touch MIR building; I expect there's an easy PR there that would skip unnecessary comparisons when the range is half-open.
When we encounter a `dyn Trait` that isn't object safe, look for its
implementors. If there's one, mention using it directly If there are
less than 9, mention the possibility of creating a new enum and using
that instead.
Account for object unsafe `impl Trait on dyn Trait {}`. Make a
distinction between public and sealed traits.
Fix#80194.
Implement `gen` blocks in the 2024 edition
Coroutines tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/43122
`gen` block tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117078
This PR implements `gen` blocks that implement `Iterator`. Most of the logic with `async` blocks is shared, and thus I renamed various types that were referring to `async` specifically.
An example usage of `gen` blocks is
```rust
fn foo() -> impl Iterator<Item = i32> {
gen {
yield 42;
for i in 5..18 {
if i.is_even() { continue }
yield i * 2;
}
}
}
```
The limitations (to be resolved) of the implementation are listed in the tracking issue
Lint `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns` by columns
This is a rework of the `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns` lint to make it more consistent. The intent of the lint is to help consumers of `non_exhaustive` enums ensure they stay up-to-date with all upstream variants. This rewrite fixes two cases we didn't handle well before:
First, because of details of exhaustiveness checking, the following wouldn't lint `Enum::C` as missing:
```rust
match Some(x) {
Some(Enum::A) => {}
Some(Enum::B) => {}
_ => {}
}
```
Second, because of the fundamental workings of exhaustiveness checking, the following would treat the `true` and `false` cases separately and thus lint about missing variants:
```rust
match (true, x) {
(true, Enum::A) => {}
(true, Enum::B) => {}
(false, Enum::C) => {}
_ => {}
}
```
Moreover, it would correctly not lint in the case where the pair is flipped, because of asymmetry in how exhaustiveness checking proceeds.
A drawback is that it no longer makes sense to set the lint level per-arm. This will silently break the lint for current users of it (but it's behind a feature gate so that's ok).
The new approach is now independent of the exhaustiveness algorithm; it's a separate pass that looks at patterns column by column. This is another of the motivations for this: I'm glad to move it out of the algorithm, it was akward there.
This PR is almost identical to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111651. cc `@eholk` who reviewed it at the time. Compared to then, I'm more confident this is the right approach.
