coverage: Unbox and simplify `bcb_filtered_successors`
This is a small cleanup in the coverage instrumentor's graph-building code.
---
This function already has access to the MIR body, so instead of taking a reference to a terminator, it's simpler and easier to pass in a basic block index.
There is no need to box the returned iterator if we instead add appropriate lifetime captures, and make `short_circuit_preorder` generic over the type of iterator it expects.
We can also greatly simplify the function's implementation by observing that the only difference between its two cases is whether we take all of a BB's successors, or just the first one.
---
`@rustbot` label +A-code-coverage
use env variable to control thread ids in rustc_log
Currently, when parallel rustc is enabled, even if the number of threads is 1, the thread ID will be included before all the logs.
E.g.
`WARN rustc_mir_build::thir::pattern::const_to_pat ...`
=>
`2:rustcWARN rustc_mir_build::thir::pattern::const_to_pat ...`
This makes the logs confusing and results in inconsistent UI test results for serial and parallel rustc. Therefore I think we should let users decide whether thread id information is needed through explicit control.
miri: make NaN generation non-deterministic
This implements the [LLVM semantics for NaN generation](https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#behavior-of-floating-point-nan-values). I will soon submit an RFC to make this also officially the Rust semantics, but it has been our de-facto semantics for a long time so there's no reason Miri has to wait for that RFC. This PR just better aligns Miri with codegen.
This PR does that just for the operations that have MIR primitives; a future PR will adjust the intrinsics.
coverage: Separate initial span extraction from span processing
One of the main subtasks of coverage instrumentation is looking through MIR to determine a list of source code spans that require coverage counters.
That task is in turn subdivided into a few main steps:
- Getting the initial spans from MIR statements/terminators
- Processing the list of spans to merge or truncate nearby spans as necessary
- Grouping the processed spans by their corresponding coverage graph node
---
This PR enforces a firmer separation between the first two steps (span extraction and span processing), which ends up slightly simplifying both steps, since they don't need to deal with state that is only meaningful for the other step.
---
`@rustbot` label +A-code-coverage
Improve handling of assertion failures with very long conditions
It's not perfectly clear what the best behaviour is here, but I think this is an improvement.
r? `@matthewjasper`
cc `@m-ou-se`
This function already has access to the MIR body, so instead of taking a
reference to a terminator, it's simpler and easier to pass in a basic block
index.
There is no need to box the returned iterator if we instead add appropriate
lifetime captures, since `short_circuit_preorder` is now generic over the type
of iterator it expects.
We can also greatly simplify the function's implementation by observing that
the only difference between its two cases is whether we take all of a BB's
successors, or just the first one.
There are several that are unused and can be removed.
And there are some calls to `to_string`, which can be expressed more
nicely as a `foo_to_string` call, and then `to_string` need not be
`pub`. (This requires adding `pat_to_string`).
This enum was mainly needed to track the precise origin of a span in MIR, for
debug printing purposes. Since the old debug code was removed in #115962, we
can replace it with just the span itself.
The assertion in `assert-long-condition.rs` used to be fail like this, all on
one line:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18\n + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0', tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5
```
The `\n` and subsequent indent is because the condition is pretty-printed, and
the pretty-printer inserts a newline. Printing the newline in this way is
arguably reasonable given that the message appears within single quotes, which
is very similar to a string literal.
However, after the assertion printing improvements that were released in 1.73,
the assertion now fails like this:
```
thread 'main' panicked at tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5:
assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18\n + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0
```
Now that there are no single quotes around the pretty-printed condition, the
`\n` is quite strange.
This commit gets rid of the `\n`, by removing the `escape_debug` done on the
pretty-printed message. This results in the following:
```
thread 'main' panicked at tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5:
assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18
+ 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0
```
The overly-large indent is still strange, but that's a separate pretty-printing issue.
This change helps with #108341.
Extend `impl`'s `def_span` to include its where clauses
Typically, we highlight the def-span of an impl in a diagnostic due to either:
1. coherence error
2. trait evaluation cycle
3. invalid implementation of built-in trait
I find that an impl's where clauses are very often required to understanding why these errors come about, which is unfortunate since where clauses may be located on different lines and don't show up in the error. This PR expands the def-span of impls to include these where clauses.
r? cjgillot since you've touched this code a while back to make some spans shorter, but you can also reassign to wg-diagnostics or compiler if you're busy or have no strong opinions.
Add RUSTFLAGS_BOOTSTRAP to RUSTFLAGS for bootstrap compilation
Adds `RUSTFLAGS_BOOTSTRAP` to `RUSTFLAGS` for bootstrap compilation when `RUSTFLAGS_BOOTSTRAP` exists in the environment. With this PR, `RUSTFLAGS_BOOTSTRAP` will affect every build(as we already do for rustc and std) compiled with stage0 compiler.
Resolves#94234
