Check representability in adt_sized_constraint
Now that representability is a query, we can use it to preemptively avoid a cycle in `adt_sized_constraint`.
I moved the representability check into `check_mod_type_wf` to avoid a scenario where rustc quits before checking all the types for representability. This also removes the check from rustdoc, which is alright AFAIK.
r? ``@cjgillot``
Migrate rustc_passes diagnostics
Picks up abandoned work from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/100870
I would like to do this collaboratively, as there is a lot of work! Here's the process:
- Comment below that you are willing to help and I will add you as a collaborator to my `rust` fork (that gives you write access)
- Indicate which file/task you would like to work on (so we don't duplicate work) from the list below
- Do the work, push up a commit, comment that you're done with that file/task
- Repeat until done 😄
### Files to Migrate (in `compiler/rustc_passes/src/`)
- [x] check_attr.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] check_const.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] dead.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] debugger_visualizer.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] diagnostic_items.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] entry.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] lang_items.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] layout_test.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] lib_features.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] ~liveness.rs~ ``@CleanCut`` Nothing to do
- [x] loops.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] naked_functions.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] stability.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] weak_lang_items.rs ``@CleanCut``
### Tasks
- [x] Rebase on current `master` ``@CleanCut``
- [x] Review work from [the earlier PR](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/100870) and make sure it all looks good
- [x] compiler/rustc_error_messages/locales/en-US/passes.ftl ``@CleanCut``
- [x] compiler/rustc_passes/src/check_attr.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] compiler/rustc_passes/src/errors.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] compiler/rustc_passes/src/lang_items.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] compiler/rustc_passes/src/lib.rs ``@CleanCut``
- [x] compiler/rustc_passes/src/weak_lang_items.rs ``@CleanCut``
rename `ImplItemKind::TyAlias` to `ImplItemKind::Type`
The naming of this variant seems inconsistent given that this is not really a "type alias", and the associated type variant for `TraitItemKind` is just called `Type`.
Remove `DefId` from some `SelectionCandidate` variants
They are both from `obligation.predicate.def_id()`, which do not need to be on the `SelectionCandidate`.
cc ````@lcnr```` ````@compiler-errors````
Remove `mir::CastKind::Misc`
As discussed in #97649 `mir::CastKind::Misc` is not clear, this PR addresses that by creating a new enum variant for every valid cast.
r? ````@oli-obk````
Rewrite representability
* Improve placement of `Box` in the suggestion
* Multiple items in a cycle emit 1 error instead of an error for each item in the cycle
* Introduce `representability` query to avoid traversing an item every time it is used.
* Also introduce `params_in_repr` query to avoid traversing generic items every time it is used.
make `compare_const_impl` a query and use it in `instance.rs`
Fixes#88365
the bug in #88365 was caused by some `instance.rs` code using the `PartialEq` impl on `Ty` to check that the type of the associated const in an impl is the same as the type of the associated const in the trait definition. This was wrong for two reasons:
- the check typeck does is that the impl type is a subtype of the trait definition's type (see `mismatched_impl_ty_2.rs` which [was ICEing](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=f6d60ebe6745011f0d52ab2bc712025d) before this PR on stable)
- it assumes that if two types are equal then the `PartialEq` impl will reflect that which isnt true for higher ranked types or type level constants when `feature(generic_const_exprs)` is enabled (see `mismatched_impl_ty_3.rs` for higher ranked types which was [ICEing on stable](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=d7af131a655ed515b035624626c62c71))
r? `@lcnr`
It's not about types or consts, but the lack of regions
pulled out of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/101900 which adds a fourth kind of non-lifetime generic parameter, and the naming of these methods would get ridiculous.
Lint against nested opaque types that don't satisfy associated type bounds
See the test failures for examples of places where this lint would fire.
r? `@oli-obk`
Move layout_of and friends from rustc_middle to rustc_ty_utils
Breaks up the very large module that is `rustc_middle::ty::layout` by fork-lifting some queries into `rustc_ty_utils::{abi, layout}`.
This does set back `rustc_ty_utils` to having untranslatable diagnostics. I'd like to leave this as a separate task.
Give `def_span` the same SyntaxContext as `span_with_body`.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/102217
I'm not sure how to add a test, since the erroneous span was crafted using a proc macro.
The debug assertion in `def_span` will ensure we have the correct behaviour.
Move lint level source explanation to the bottom
So, uhhhhh
r? `@estebank`
## User-facing change
"note: `#[warn(...)]` on by default" and such are moved to the bottom of the diagnostic:
```diff
- = note: `#[warn(unsupported_calling_conventions)]` on by default
= warning: this was previously accepted by the compiler but is being phased out; it will become a hard error in a future release!
= note: for more information, see issue #87678 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87678>
+ = note: `#[warn(unsupported_calling_conventions)]` on by default
```
Why warning is enabled is the least important thing, so it shouldn't be the first note the user reads, IMO.
## Developer-facing change
`struct_span_lint` and similar methods have a different signature.
Before: `..., impl for<'a> FnOnce(LintDiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>)`
After: `..., impl Into<DiagnosticMessage>, impl for<'a, 'b> FnOnce(&'b mut DiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>) -> &'b mut DiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>`
The reason for this is that `struct_span_lint` needs to edit the diagnostic _after_ `decorate` closure is called. This also makes lint code a little bit nicer in my opinion.
Another option is to use `impl for<'a> FnOnce(LintDiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>) -> DiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>` altough I don't _really_ see reasons to do `let lint = lint.build(message)` everywhere.
## Subtle problem
By moving the message outside of the closure (that may not be called if the lint is disabled) `format!(...)` is executed earlier, possibly formatting `Ty` which may call a query that trims paths that crashes the compiler if there were no warnings...
I don't think it's that big of a deal, considering that we move from `format!(...)` to `fluent` (which is lazy by-default) anyway, however this required adding a workaround which is unfortunate.
## P.S.
I'm sorry, I do not how to make this PR smaller/easier to review. Changes to the lint API affect SO MUCH 😢
