Add support for inherent projections in new solver
Not hard to support these, and it cuts out a really big chunk of failing UI tests with `--compare-mode=next-solver`
r? `@lcnr` (feel free to reassign, anyone can review this)
Don't call `predicate_must_hold`-esque functions during fulfillment in intercrate
Fixes#113415
Given that this only happens in `translate_substs`, I don't actually think that this is something that you can weaponize, but it's still sketchy regardless.
r? `@lcnr`
Check entry type as part of item type checking.
This code is currently executed inside the root `analysis` query.
Instead, check it during `check_for_entry_fn(CRATE_DEF_ID)` to hopefully avoid some re-executions.
`CRATE_DEF_ID` is chosen by considering that entry fn are typically at crate root, so the corresponding HIR should already be in the dependencies.
Add `#[rustc_confusables]` attribute to allow targeted "no method" error suggestions on standard library types
After this PR, the standard library developer can annotate methods on e.g. `BTreeSet::push` with `#[rustc_confusables("insert")]`. When the user mistypes `btreeset.push()`, `BTreeSet::insert` will be suggested if there are no other candidates to suggest. This PR lays the foundations for contributors to add `rustc_confusables` annotations to standard library types for targeted suggestions, as specified in #59450, or to address cases such as #108437.
### Example
Assume `BTreeSet` is the standard library type:
```
// Standard library definition
#![feature(rustc_attrs)]
struct BTreeSet;
impl BTreeSet {
#[rustc_confusables("push")]
fn insert(&self) {}
}
// User code
fn main() {
let x = BTreeSet {};
x.push();
}
```
A new suggestion (which has lower precedence than suggestions for misspellings and only is shown when there are no misspellings suggestions) will be added to hint the user maybe they intended to write `x.insert()` instead:
```
error[E0599]: no method named `push` found for struct `BTreeSet` in the current scope
--> test.rs:12:7
|
3 | struct BTreeSet;
| --------------- method `push` not found for this struct
...
12 | x.push();
| ^^^^ method not found in `BTreeSet`
|
help: you might have meant to use `insert`
|
12 | x.insert();
| ~~~~~~
error: aborting due to previous error
```
Hide `compiler_builtins` in the prelude
This crate is a private implementation detail. We only need to insert it into the crate graph for linking and should not expose any of its public API.
Fixes#113533
"no method" errors on standard library types
The standard library developer can annotate methods on e.g.
`BTreeSet::push` with `#[rustc_confusables("insert")]`. When the user
mistypes `btreeset.push()`, `BTreeSet::insert` will be suggested if
there are no other candidates to suggest.
De-duplicate consecutive libs when printing native-static-libs
This PR adds a de-duplicate step just before printing the `native-static-libs`.
This step de-duplicates all the consecutive libs based only on the relevant comparison elements (this exclude spans, ast elements, ...).
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/113209
Don't require each rustc_interface tool to opt-in to parallel_compiler
Previously, forgetting to call `interface::set_thread_safe_mode` would cause the following ICE:
```
thread 'rustc' panicked at 'uninitialized dyn_thread_safe mode!', /rustc/dfe0683138de0959b6ab6a039b54d9347f6a6355/compiler/rustc_data_structures/src/sync.rs:74:18
```
This calls `set_thread_safe_mode` in `interface::run_compiler` to avoid requiring it in the caller.
Fixes `tests/run-make-fulldeps/issue-19371` when parallel-compiler is enabled.
r? `@SparrowLii` cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/75760
rustdoc: use src consistently over source in CSS/JS
The two terms have been used, inconsistently, in closely related spots like the `src/` directory vs `source-files.js`, and with things like `src-sidebar-toggle` vs the `source-sidebar`. This PR changes most use of `source` to `src` instead (except the localStorage configuration variables, which would be very complicated to migrate).
It also renames `.srclink` to `.src`. This is mostly aiming to cut out one of those many little peanut-butter bits of bloat, and is consistent with how other link classes are done (like how you have `a.mod` stylesheet rules, but there's also a `mod` class put on the body tag).
Implement "items do not inherit unsafety" note for THIR unsafeck
Implements the "items do not inherit unsafety from separate enclosing items" note from the MIR unsafety checker in the THIR unsafety checker (`-Z thir-unsafeck`) to maintain parity between the two unsafety checkers. The logic to find the separate enclosing item is nearly the same as in the MIR unsafety checker.
Structurally normalize in selection
We need to do this because of the fact that we're checking the `Ty::kind` on a type during selection, but goals passed into select are not necessarily normalized.
Right now, we're (kinda) unnecessarily normalizing the RHS of a trait upcasting goal, which is broken for different reasons (#113393). But I'm waiting for this PR to land before discussing that one.
r? `@lcnr`
Resurrect: rustc_target: Add alignment to indirectly-passed by-value types, correcting the alignment of byval on x86 in the process.
Same as #111551, which I [accidentally closed](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111551#issuecomment-1571222612) :/
---
This resurrects PR #103830, which has sat idle for a while.
Beyond #103830, this also:
- fixes byval alignment for types containing vectors on Darwin (see `tests/codegen/align-byval-vector.rs`)
- fixes byval alignment for overaligned types on x86 Windows (see `tests/codegen/align-byval.rs`)
- fixes ABI for types with 128bit requested alignment on ARM64 Linux (see `tests/codegen/aarch64-struct-align-128.rs`)
r? `@nikic`
---
`@pcwalton's` original PR description is reproduced below:
Commit 88e4d2c from five years ago removed
support for alignment on indirectly-passed arguments because of problems with
the `i686-pc-windows-msvc` target. Unfortunately, the `memcpy` optimizations I
recently added to LLVM 16 depend on this to forward `memcpy`s. This commit
attempts to fix the problems with `byval` parameters on that target and now
correctly adds the `align` attribute.
The problem is summarized in [this comment] by `@eddyb.` Briefly, 32-bit x86 has
special alignment rules for `byval` parameters: for the most part, their
alignment is forced to 4. This is not well-documented anywhere but in the Clang
source. I looked at the logic in Clang `TargetInfo.cpp` and tried to replicate
it here. The relevant methods in that file are
`X86_32ABIInfo::getIndirectResult()` and
`X86_32ABIInfo::getTypeStackAlignInBytes()`. The `align` parameter attribute
for `byval` parameters in LLVM must match the platform ABI, or miscompilations
will occur. Note that this doesn't use the approach suggested by eddyb, because
I felt it was overkill to store the alignment in `on_stack` when special
handling is really only needed for 32-bit x86.
As a side effect, this should fix#80127, because it will make the `align`
parameter attribute for `byval` parameters match the platform ABI on LLVM
x86-64.
[this comment]: #80822 (comment)
Allow escaping bound vars during `normalize_erasing_regions` in new solver
Add `AllowEscapingBoundVars` to `deeply_normalize`, and use it in the new solver in the `query_normalize` routine.
Ideally, we'd make all `query_normalize` calls handle pass in `AllowEscapingBoundVars` individually, because really the only `query_normalize` call that needs `AllowEscapingBoundVars::Yes` is the one in `try_normalize_generic_arg_after_erasing_regions`, but I think that's kind of overkill. I am happy to be convinced otherwise, though.
r? `@lcnr`
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #113599 (Use maybe_body_owned_by for multiple suggestions)
- #113662 (Rename VecDeque's `rotate_left` and `rotate_right` parameters)
- #113681 (rustdoc-json: Add test for private supertrait.)
- #113682 (trait system refactor ping: also apply to nested modules of `solve`)
- #113685 (Print artifact sizes in `opt-dist`)
- #113688 (llvm-wrapper: update for LLVM API change)
- #113692 (tests: adapt for removal of -opaque-pointers in LLVM 17)
- #113698 (Make it clearer that we're just checking for an RPITIT)
- #113699 (update Miri)
Failed merges:
- #113625 (Structurally normalize in selection)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Use maybe_body_owned_by for multiple suggestions
This is a continued work from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/113567
We have several other suggestions not working for closure, this PR use `maybe_body_owned_by` to fix them and add test cases for them.
This crate is a private implementation detail. We only need to insert it
into the crate graph for linking and should not expose any of its public
API.
Fixes#113533
Eliminate ZST allocations in `Box` and `Vec`
This PR fixes 2 issues with `Box` and `RawVec` related to ZST allocations. Specifically, the `Allocator` trait requires that:
- If you allocate a zero-sized layout then you must later deallocate it, otherwise the allocator may leak memory.
- You cannot pass a ZST pointer to the allocator that you haven't previously allocated.
These restrictions exist because an allocator implementation is allowed to allocate non-zero amounts of memory for a zero-sized allocation. For example, `malloc` in libc does this.
Currently, ZSTs are handled differently in `Box` and `Vec`:
- `Vec` never allocates when `T` is a ZST or if the vector capacity is 0.
- `Box` just blindly passes everything on to the allocator, including ZSTs.
This causes problems due to the free conversions between `Box<[T]>` and `Vec<T>`, specifically that ZST allocations could get leaked or a dangling pointer could be passed to `deallocate`.
This PR fixes this by changing `Box` to not allocate for zero-sized values and slices. It also fixes a bug in `RawVec::shrink` where shrinking to a size of zero did not actually free the backing memory.
Add jump to doc
I'm using the source code pages of the compiler quite a lot, but one thing missing is the possibility to jump back from the source code to the item documentation. Since I also got a few others complaining about it, I think it's fine to add it since this option is nightly only.
This PR adds a link to jump back to item's documentation on the item definition (so on `Bar` in `struct Bar {... }`, as described in the unofficial [RFC](https://github.com/GuillaumeGomez/rfcs/blob/rustdoc-jump-to-definition/text/000-rustdoc-jump-to-definition.md)).
r? ````@notriddle````
Test simd-wide-sum for codegen error
This adds the necessary test infrastructure to "build-pass" codegen tests, for the purpose of doing that for a single revision of a codegen test. When mir-opts are tested, the output may vary from the usual, and maybe for positive reasons... but we don't necessarily want to output such bad LLVMIR that LLVM starts crashing on it.
Currently when enabling MIR opts at higher levels this LLVMIR is still emitted, but it was previously disabled for getting in mir-opt's way and as this new revision without `// [mir-opt3]build-pass` would make it more likely to, I would like to not see the testing for the actual results regress again just because it was bundled with an ICE check as well.
This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/98016
Implement selection for `Unsize` for better coercion behavior
In order for much of coercion to succeed, we need to be able to deal with partial ambiguity of `Unsize` traits during selection. However, I pessimistically implemented selection in the new trait solver to just bail out with ambiguity if it was a built-in impl:
9227ff28af/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/solve/eval_ctxt/select.rs (L126)
This implements a proper "rematch" procedure for dealing with built-in `Unsize` goals, so that even if the goal is ambiguous, we are able to get nested obligations which are used in the coercion selection-like loop:
9227ff28af/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/coercion.rs (L702)
Second commit just moves a `resolve_vars_if_possible` call to fix a bug where we weren't detecting a trait upcasting to occur.
r? ``@lcnr``
...which seems not to be available on some platforms.
Or maybe it is under a different name but I don't want to deal with that
Instead, use two u64s. This isn't exactly the same, but we already have
some coverage of the packed u128 case in another test, so it's not
essential to have it here.
