diagnostics: Do not suggest using `#[unix_sigpipe]` without a value
Remove `Word` from the `unix_sigpipe` attribute template so that plain `#[unix_sigpipe]` is not included in suggestions of valid forms of the attribute. Also re-arrange diagnostics code slightly to avoid duplicate diagnostics.
Tracking issue is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97889.
MIR printing: print the path of uneval'd const
Currently it just prints `const _` which makes it impossible to say which constant is being referred to.
Also refer to promoteds in a consistent way; previously MIR printing would do
```
promoted[0] in C1: &Option<Cell<i32>> = {
// ...
}
```
Now that should be
```
const C1::promoted[0]: &Option<Cell<i32>> = {
// ...
}
```
We don't seem to have a test for that so I tried it by hand, it seems to work:
```
const main::promoted[12]: &[&str; 3] = {
let mut _0: &[&str; 3];
let mut _1: [&str; 3];
let mut _2: &str;
let mut _3: &str;
let mut _4: &str;
let mut _5: &str;
bb0: {
_3 = const "b";
_2 = &(*_3);
_5 = const "c";
_4 = &(*_5);
_1 = [const "a", move _2, move _4];
_0 = &_1;
return;
}
}
```
Remove `Word` from the `unix_sigpipe` attribute template so that plain
`#[unix_sigpipe]` is not included in suggestions of valid forms of the
attribute. Also re-arrange diagnostics code slightly to avoid duplicate
diagnostics.
Fix legacy numeric constant diag items
- missed syms for usize/isize
- missed diag items on unsigned integers
For rust-lang/rust-clippy#12312
r? ```@Nilstrieb```
Follow-up to #121272, #121361, #121667
This should be the last one 🤞 Sorry!
match lowering: define a convenient struct
Small refactor PR: `bindings` and `ascriptions` always come together so I made a struct for them. I'll have one or two fields to add to it in a later PR as well.
Add a tidy check that checks whether the fluent slugs only appear once
As ``````@Nilstrieb`````` said in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121828#issuecomment-1972622855:
> Might make sense to have a tidy check that checks whether the fluent slugs only appear once in the source code and lint for that
there's a tidy check already for sorting
We can get the tidy check error:
```
tidy check
tidy error: /path/to/rust/compiler/rustc_const_eval/messages.ftl: message `const_eval_invalid_align` is not used
tidy error: /path/to/rust/compiler/rustc_lint/messages.ftl: message `lint_trivial_untranslatable_diag` is not used
tidy error: /path/to/rust/compiler/rustc_parse/messages.ftl: message `parse_invalid_literal_suffix` is not used
tidy error: /path/to/rust/compiler/rustc_infer/messages.ftl: message `infer_need_type_info_in_coroutine` is not used
tidy error: /path/to/rust/compiler/rustc_passes/messages.ftl: message `passes_expr_not_allowed_in_context` is not used
tidy error: /path/to/rust/compiler/rustc_passes/messages.ftl: message `passes_layout` is not used
tidy error: /path/to/rust/compiler/rustc_parse/messages.ftl: message `parse_not_supported` is not used
```
r? ``````@Nilstrieb``````
Distinguish between library and lang UB in assert_unsafe_precondition
As described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121583#issuecomment-1963168186, `assert_unsafe_precondition` now explicitly distinguishes between language UB (conditions we explicitly optimize on) and library UB (things we document you shouldn't do, and maybe some library internals assume you don't do).
`debug_assert_nounwind` was originally added to avoid the "only at runtime" aspect of `assert_unsafe_precondition`. Since then the difference between the macros has gotten muddied. This totally revamps the situation.
Now _all_ preconditions shall be checked with `assert_unsafe_precondition`. If you have a precondition that's only checkable at runtime, do a `const_eval_select` hack, as done in this PR.
r? RalfJung
Remove `Ord` from `ClosureKind`
Using `Ord` to accomplish a meaning of subset relationship can be hard to read. The existing uses for that are easily replaced with a `match`, and in my opinion, more readable without needing to resorting to comments to explain the intention.
cc `@compiler-errors`
Some tweaks to the parallel query cycle handler
This renames `deadlock` to `break_query_cycles`. The abort logic is moved next to the thread spawning and gives the thread a name.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/122035.
r? ```@oli-obk```
Move metadata header and version checks together
This will make it easier to report rustc versions for older metadata formats.
Split out of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120855
Eagerly translate `HelpUseLatestEdition` in parser diagnostics
Fixes#122130.
This makes me suspicious of these other two usage of `add_to_diagnostic()`. Would they *also* crash? I haven't attempted to construct test cases for them.
```
compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/expr.rs
3453: errors::HelpUseLatestEdition::new().add_to_diagnostic(e);
compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/expr.rs
2603: HelpUseLatestEdition::new().add_to_diagnostic(&mut err);
```
This also seems like a footgun?
Misc improvements to non local defs lint implementation
This PR is a collection of small improvements I found when I [needlessly tried](https://www.github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120393#issuecomment-1971787475) to fix a "perf-regression" in the lint implementation.
I recommend looking at each commit individually.
Using `Ord` to accomplish a meaning of subset relationship
can be hard to read. The existing uses for that are easily
replaced with a `match`, and in my opinion, more readable
without needing to resorting to comments to explain the
intention.
Optimize `Symbol::integer` by utilizing in-place formatting
This PR optimize `Symbol::integer` by utilizing `itoa` in-place formatting instead of going through a dynamically allocated `String` and the format machinery.
<details>
For some context: I was profiling `rustc --check-cfg` with callgrind and due to the way we currently setup all the targets and we end-up calling `Symbol::integer` multiple times for all the targets. Using `itoa` reduced the number of instructions.
</details>
Lint singleton gaps after exclusive ranges
In the discussion to stabilize exclusive range patterns (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/37854), it has often come up that they're likely to cause off-by-one mistakes. We already have the `overlapping_range_endpoints` lint, so I [proposed](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/37854#issuecomment-1845580712) a lint to catch the complementary mistake.
This PR adds a new `non_contiguous_range_endpoints` lint that catches likely off-by-one errors with exclusive range patterns. Here's the idea (see the test file for more examples):
```rust
match x {
0..10 => ..., // WARN: this range doesn't match `10_u8` because `..` is an exclusive range
11..20 => ..., // this could appear to continue range `0_u8..10_u8`, but `10_u8` isn't matched by either of them
_ => ...,
}
// help: use an inclusive range instead: `0_u8..=10_u8`
```
More precisely: for any exclusive range `lo..hi`, if `hi+1` is matched by another range but `hi` isn't, we suggest writing an inclusive range `lo..=hi` instead. We also catch `lo..T::MAX`.
Avoid invoking the `intrinsic` query for DefKinds other than `Fn` or `AssocFn`
fixes the perf regression from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120675 by only invoking (and thus inserting into the dep graph) the `intrinsic` query if the `DefKind` matches items that can actually be intrinsics
