As our implementation of MCP411 nears completion and we begin to
solicit testing, it's no longer reasonable to expect testers to
type or remember `BikeshedIntrinsicFrom`. The name degrades the
ease-of-reading of documentation, and the overall experience of
using compiler safe transmute.
Tentatively, we'll instead adopt `TransmuteFrom`.
This name seems to be the one most likely to be stabilized, after
discussion on Zulip [1]. We may want to revisit the ordering of
`Src` and `Dst` before stabilization, at which point we'd likely
consider `TransmuteInto` or `Transmute`.
[1] https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/216762-project-safe-transmute/topic/What.20should.20.60BikeshedIntrinsicFrom.60.20be.20named.3F
In its first step of computing transmutability, `rustc_transmutability`
constructs a byte-level representation of type layout (`Tree`). Previously, this
representation was computed for ADTs by inspecting the ADT definition and
performing our own layout computations. This process was error-prone, verbose,
and limited our ability to analyze many types (particularly default-repr types).
In this PR, we instead construct `Tree`s from `rustc_target::abi::Layout`s. This
helps ensure that layout optimizations are reflected our analyses, and increases
the kinds of types we can now analyze, including:
- default repr ADTs
- transparent unions
- `UnsafeCell`-containing types
Overall, this PR expands the expressvity of `rustc_transmutability` to be much
closer to the transmutability analysis performed by miri. Future PRs will work
to close the remaining gaps (e.g., support for `Box`, raw pointers, `NonZero*`,
coroutines, etc.).
