A dev build almost certainly means that whoever's built the compiler
has the opportunity to rerun it to collect a more complete trace. So
we don't need to default to a complete trace; we should hide irrelevant
details by default.
Fix parenthesization of chained comparisons by pretty-printer
Example:
```rust
macro_rules! repro {
() => {
1 < 2
};
}
fn main() {
let _ = repro!() == false;
}
```
Previously `-Zunpretty=expanded` would pretty-print this syntactically invalid output: `fn main() { let _ = 1 < 2 == false; }`
```console
error: comparison operators cannot be chained
--> <anon>:8:23
|
8 | fn main() { let _ = 1 < 2 == false; }
| ^ ^^
|
help: parenthesize the comparison
|
8 | fn main() { let _ = (1 < 2) == false; }
| + +
```
With the fix, it will print `fn main() { let _ = (1 < 2) == false; }`.
Making `-Zunpretty=expanded` consistently produce syntactically valid Rust output is important because that is what makes it possible for `cargo expand` to format and perform filtering on the expanded code.
## Review notes
According to `rg '\.fixity\(\)' compiler/` the `fixity` function is called only 3 places:
- 13170cd787/compiler/rustc_ast_pretty/src/pprust/state/expr.rs (L283-L287)
- 13170cd787/compiler/rustc_hir_pretty/src/lib.rs (L1295-L1299)
- 13170cd787/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/expr.rs (L282-L289)
The 2 pretty printers definitely want to treat comparisons using `Fixity::None`. That's the whole bug being fixed. Meanwhile, the parser's `Fixity::None` codepath is previously unreachable as indicated by the comment, so as long as `Fixity::None` here behaves exactly the way that `Fixity::Left` used to behave, you can tell that this PR definitely does not constitute any behavior change for the parser.
My guess for why comparison operators were set to `Fixity::Left` instead of `Fixity::None` is that it's a very old workaround for giving a good chained comparisons diagnostic (like what I pasted above). Nowadays that is handled by a different dedicated codepath.
Detect missing `.` in method chain in `let` bindings and statements
On parse errors where an ident is found where one wasn't expected, see if the next elements might have been meant as method call or field access.
```
error: expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator, found `map`
--> $DIR/missing-dot-on-statement-expression.rs:7:29
|
LL | let _ = [1, 2, 3].iter()map(|x| x);
| ^^^ expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator
|
help: you might have meant to write a method call
|
LL | let _ = [1, 2, 3].iter().map(|x| x);
| +
```
On parse errors where an ident is found where one wasn't expected, see if the next elements might have been meant as method call or field access.
```
error: expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator, found `map`
--> $DIR/missing-dot-on-statement-expression.rs:7:29
|
LL | let _ = [1, 2, 3].iter()map(|x| x);
| ^^^ expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator
|
help: you might have meant to write a method call
|
LL | let _ = [1, 2, 3].iter().map(|x| x);
| +
```
Also lint on option of function pointer comparisons
This PR is the first part of #134536, ie. the linting on `Option<{fn ptr}>` in the `unpredictable_function_pointer_comparisons` lint, which isn't part of the lang nomination that the second part is going trough, and so should be able to be approved independently.
Related to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134527
r? `@compiler-errors`
Restrict `#[non_exaustive]` on structs with default field values
Do not allow users to apply `#[non_exaustive]` to a struct when they have also used default field values.
Arbitrary self types v2: no deshadow pre feature.
The arbitrary self types v2 work introduces a check for shadowed methods, whereby a method in some "outer" smart pointer type may called in preference to a method in the inner referent. This is bad if the outer pointer adds a method later, as it may change behavior, so we ensure we error in this circumstance.
It was intended that this new shadowing detection system only comes into play for users who enable the `arbitrary_self_types` feature (or of course everyone later if it's stabilized). It was believed that the new deshadowing code couldn't be reached without building the custom smart pointers that `arbitrary_self_types` enables, and therefore there was no risk of this code impacting existing users.
However, it turns out that cunning use of `Pin::get_ref` can cause this type of shadowing error to be emitted now. This commit adds a test for this case.
As we want this test to pass without arbitrary_self_types, but fail with it, I've split it into two files (one with run-pass and one without). If there's a better way I can amend it.
Part of #44874
r? ```@wesleywiser```
Precedence improvements: closures and jumps
This PR fixes some cases where rustc's pretty printers would redundantly parenthesize expressions that didn't need it.
<table>
<tr><th>Before</th><th>After</th></tr>
<tr><td><code>return (|x: i32| x)</code></td><td><code>return |x: i32| x</code></td></tr>
<tr><td><code>(|| -> &mut () { std::process::abort() }).clone()</code></td><td><code>|| -> &mut () { std::process::abort() }.clone()</code></td></tr>
<tr><td><code>(continue) + 1</code></td><td><code>continue + 1</code></td></tr>
</table>
Tested by `echo "fn main() { let _ = $AFTER; }" | rustc -Zunpretty=expanded /dev/stdin`.
The pretty-printer aims to render the syntax tree as it actually exists in rustc, as faithfully as possible, in Rust syntax. It can insert parentheses where forced by Rust's grammar in order to preserve the meaning of a macro-generated syntax tree, for example in the case of `a * $rhs` where $rhs is `b + c`. But for any expression parsed from source code, without a macro involved, there should never be a reason for inserting additional parentheses not present in the original.
For closures and jumps (return, break, continue, yield, do yeet, become) the unneeded parentheses came from the precedence of some of these expressions being misidentified. In the same order as the table above:
- Jumps and closures are supposed to have equal precedence. The [Rust Reference](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.83.0/reference/expressions.html#expression-precedence) says so, and in Syn they do. There is no Rust syntax that would require making a precedence distinction between jumps and closures. But in rustc these were previously 2 distinct levels with the closure being lower, hence the parentheses around a closure inside a jump (but not a jump inside a closure).
- When a closure is written with an explicit return type, the grammar [requires](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.83.0/reference/expressions/closure-expr.html) that the closure body consists of exactly one block expression, not any other arbitrary expression as usual for closures. Parsing of the closure body does not continue after the block expression. So in `|| { 0 }.clone()` the clone is inside the closure body and applies to `{ 0 }`, whereas in `|| -> _ { 0 }.clone()` the clone is outside and applies to the closure as a whole.
- Continue never needs parentheses. It was previously marked as having the lowest possible precedence but it should have been the highest, next to paths and loops and function calls, not next to jumps.
unimplement `PointerLike` for trait objects
Values of type `dyn* PointerLike` or `dyn PointerLike` are not pointer-like so these types should not implement `PointerLike`.
After https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133226, `PointerLike` allows user implementations, so we can't just mark it with `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl(implement_via_object = false)]`. Instead, this PR splits the `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl(implement_via_object = ...)]` attribute into two separate attributes `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl]` and `#[rustc_do_not_implement_via_object]` so that we opt out of the automatic `impl PointerLike for dyn PointerLike` and still allow user implementations.
For traits that are marked with `#[do_not_implement_via_object]` but not `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl]` I've also made it possible to add a manual `impl Trait for dyn Trait`. There is no immediate need for this, but it was one line to implement and seems nice to have.
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134545
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134543
r? `@compiler-errors`
Remove some dead code around import library generation
This was missed when replacing the usage of LLVM for generating import libraries.
``@bors`` rollup
Reduce the amount of explicit FatalError.raise()
Instead use dcx.abort_if_error() or guar.raise_fatal() instead. These guarantee that an error actually happened previously and thus we don't silently abort.
This commit splits the `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl(implement_via_object = ...)]` attribute
into two attributes `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl]` and `#[rustc_do_not_implement_via_object]`.
This allows us to have special traits that can have user-defined impls but do not have the
automatic trait impl for trait objects (`impl Trait for dyn Trait`).
Instead use dcx.abort_if_error() or guar.raise_fatal() instead. These
guarantee that an error actually happened previously and thus we don't
silently abort.
coverage: Rename `basic_coverage_blocks` to just `graph`
During coverage instrumentation, this variable always holds the current function's coverage graph, which is a simplified view of its MIR control-flow graph. The new name is clearer in context, and also shorter.
---
This is purely a rename, so there is no functional change.
Improve dependency_format a bit
* Make `DependencyList` an `IndexVec` rather than emulating one using a `Vec` (which was off-by-one as LOCAL_CRATE was intentionally skipped)
* Update some comments for the fact that we now use `#[global_allocator]` rather than `extern crate alloc_system;`/`extern crate alloc_jemalloc;` for specifying which allocator to use. We still use a similar mechanism for the panic runtime, so refer to the panic runtime in those comments instead.
* An unrelated refactor to `create_and_enter_global_ctxt` I forgot to include in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134302. This refactor is too small to be worth it's own PR.
Fix logical error with what text is considered whitespace.
There appears to be a logical issue around what counts as leading white-space. There is code which does a subtraction assuming that no errors will be reported inside the leading whitespace. However we compute the length of that whitespace with std::char::is_whitespace and not rustc_lexer::is_whitespace. The former will include a no-break space while later will excluded it. We can only safely make the assumption that no errors will be reported in whitespace if it is all "Rust Standard" whitespace. Indeed an error does occur in unicode whitespace if it contains a no-break space. In that case the subtraction will cause a ICE (for a compiler in debug mode) as described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132918.
The arbitrary self types v2 work introduces a check for shadowed
methods, whereby a method in some "outer" smart pointer type may called
in preference to a method in the inner referent. This is bad if the
outer pointer adds a method later, as it may change behavior, so we
ensure we error in this circumstance.
It was intended that this new shadowing detection system only comes into
play for users who enable the `arbitrary_self_types` feature (or of
course everyone later if it's stabilized). It was believed that the
new deshadowing code couldn't be reached without building the custom
smart pointers that `arbitrary_self_types` enables, and therefore there
was no risk of this code impacting existing users.
However, it turns out that cunning use of `Pin::get_ref` can cause
this type of shadowing error to be emitted now. This commit adds a test
for this case.
During coverage instrumentation, this variable always holds the coverage graph,
which is a simplified view of the MIR control-flow graph. The new name is
clearer in context, and also shorter.
Use `MixedBitSet`s in const qualif
These analyses' domains should be very homogeneous, having compressed bitmaps on huge cfgs should make a difference (and doesn’t have an impact on the smaller / regular cfgs in our benchmarks).
This is a >40% walltime reduction on [this stress test](https://github.com/Manishearth/icu4x_compile_sample) extracted from a real world ICU case, and a 10x or so max-rss reduction.
cc `@oli-obk` `@RalfJung`
Should help with (or fix) issue #134404.
Speed up `Parser::expected_tokens`
The constant pushing/clearing of `Parser::expected_tokens` during parsing is slow. This PR speeds it up greatly.
r? `@estebank`
Make sure we handle `backwards_incompatible_lint` drops appropriately in drop elaboration
In #131326, a new kind of scheduled drop (`drop_kind: DropKind::Value` + `backwards_incompatible_lint: true`) was added so that we could insert a new kind of no-op MIR statement (`backward incompatible drop`) for linting purposes.
These drops were intended to have *no side-effects*, but drop elaboration code forgot to handle these drops specially and they were handled otherwise as normal drops in most of the code. This ends up being **unsound** since we insert more than one drop call for some values, which means that `Drop::drop` could be called more than once.
This PR fixes this by splitting out the `DropKind::ForLint` and adjusting the code. I'm not totally certain if all of the places I've adjusted are either reachable or correct, but I'm pretty certain that it's *more* correct than it was previously.
cc `@dingxiangfei2009`
r? nikomatsakis
Fixes#134482
Remove a duplicated check that doesn't do anything anymore.
fixes#134005
This code didn't actually `lub` the type of the previous expressions, but just the current type over and over again. Changing it to using the actual expression type does not change anything either, so may as well remove the entire loop.
coverage: Store coverage source regions as `Span` until codegen (take 2)
This is an attempt to re-land #133418:
> Historically, coverage spans were converted into line/column coordinates during the MIR instrumentation pass.
> This PR moves that conversion step into codegen, so that coverage spans spend most of their time stored as Span instead.
> In addition to being conceptually nicer, this also reduces the size of coverage mappings in MIR, because Span is smaller than 4x u32.
That PR was reverted by #133608, because in some circumstances not covered by our test suite we were emitting coverage metadata that was causing `llvm-cov` to exit with an error (#133606).
---
The implementation here is *mostly* the same, but adapted for subsequent changes in the relevant code (e.g. #134163).
I believe that the changes in #134163 should be sufficient to prevent the problem that required the original PR to be reverted. But I haven't been able to reproduce the original breakage in a regression test, and the `llvm-cov` error message is extremely unhelpful, so I can't completely rule out the possibility of this breaking again.
r? jieyouxu (reviewer of the original PR)
