When using `..` somewhere other than the end, parse the rest of the
pattern correctly while still emitting an error.
Add suggestions to either remove trailing `,` or moving the `..` to the
end.
We currently give a specific message when encountering a `..` anywhere
other than the end of a pattern. Modify the parser to accept it (while
still emitting the error) so that we don't also trigger "missing fields
in pattern" errors afterwards.
add suggestion applicabilities to librustc and libsyntax
A down payment on #50723. Interested in feedback on whether my `MaybeIncorrect` vs. `MachineApplicable` judgement calls are well-calibrated (and that we have a consensus on what this means).
r? @Manishearth
cc @killercup @estebank
Fix span for type-only arguments
Currently it points to the comma or parenthesis before the type, which is broken
cc @mark-i-m this is what broke #48309
r? @estebank
rustc: Correctly pretty-print macro delimiters
This commit updates the `Mac_` AST structure to keep track of the delimiters
that it originally had for its invocation. This allows us to faithfully
pretty-print macro invocations not using parentheses (e.g. `vec![...]`). This in
turn helps procedural macros due to #43081.
Closes#50840
This commit updates the `Mac_` AST structure to keep track of the delimiters
that it originally had for its invocation. This allows us to faithfully
pretty-print macro invocations not using parentheses (e.g. `vec![...]`). This in
turn helps procedural macros due to #43081.
Closes#50840
rustc: introduce {ast,hir}::AnonConst to consolidate so-called "embedded constants".
Previously, constants in array lengths and enum variant discriminants were "merely an expression", and had no separate ID for, e.g. type-checking or const-eval, instead reusing the expression's.
That complicated code working with bodies, because such constants were the only special case where the "owner" of the body wasn't the HIR parent, but rather the same node as the body itself.
Also, if the body happened to be a closure, we had no way to allocate a `DefId` for both the constant *and* the closure, leading to *several* bugs (mostly ICEs where type errors were expected).
This PR rectifies the situation by adding another (`{ast,hir}::AnonConst`) node around every such constant. Also, const generics are expected to rely on the new `AnonConst` nodes, as well (cc @varkor).
* fixes#48838
* fixes#50600
* fixes#50688
* fixes#50689
* obsoletes #50623
r? @nikomatsakis
Consider this a down payment on #50723. To recap, an `Applicability`
enum was recently (#50204) added, to convey to Rustfix and other tools
whether we think it's OK for them to blindly apply the suggestion, or
whether to prompt a human for guidance (because the suggestion might
contain placeholders that we can't infer, or because we think it has a
sufficiently high probability of being wrong even though it's—
presumably—right often enough to be worth emitting in the first place).
When a suggestion is marked as `MaybeIncorrect`, we try to use comments
to indicate precisely why (although there are a few places where we just
say `// speculative` because the present author's subjective judgement
balked at the idea that the suggestion has no false positives).
The `run-rustfix` directive is opporunistically set on some relevant UI
tests (and a couple tests that were in the `test/ui/suggestions`
directory, even if the suggestions didn't originate in librustc or
libsyntax). This is less trivial than it sounds, because a surprising
number of test files aren't equipped to be tested as fixed even when
they contain successfully fixable errors, because, e.g., there are more,
not-directly-related errors after fixing. Some test files need an
attribute or underscore to avoid unused warnings tripping up the "fixed
code is still producing diagnostics" check despite the fixes being
correct; this is an interesting contrast-to/inconsistency-with the
behavior of UI tests (which secretly pass `-A unused`), a behavior which
we probably ought to resolve one way or the other (filed issue #50926).
A few suggestion labels are reworded (e.g., to avoid phrasing it as a
question, which which is discouraged by the style guidelines listed in
`.span_suggestion`'s doc-comment).
Speed up the macro parser
These three commits reduce the number of allocations done by the macro parser, in some cases dramatically. For example, for a clean check builds of html5ever, the number of allocations is reduced by 40%.
Here are the rustc-benchmarks that are sped up by at least 1%.
```
html5ever-check
avg: -6.6% min: -10.3% max: -4.1%
html5ever
avg: -5.2% min: -9.5% max: -2.8%
html5ever-opt
avg: -4.3% min: -9.3% max: -1.6%
crates.io-check
avg: -1.8% min: -2.9% max: -0.6%
crates.io-opt
avg: -1.0% min: -2.2% max: -0.1%
crates.io
avg: -1.1% min: -2.2% max: -0.2%
```
Rollup of 12 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #50302 (Add query search order check)
- #50320 (Fix invalid path generation in rustdoc search)
- #50349 (Rename "show type declaration" to "show declaration")
- #50360 (Clarify wordings of the `unstable_name_collision` lint.)
- #50365 (Use two vectors in nearest_common_ancestor.)
- #50393 (Allow unaligned reads in constants)
- #50401 (Revert "Implement FromStr for PathBuf")
- #50406 (Forbid constructing empty identifiers from concat_idents)
- #50407 (Always inline simple BytePos and CharPos methods.)
- #50416 (check if the token is a lifetime before parsing)
- #50417 (Update Cargo)
- #50421 (Fix ICE when using a..=b in a closure.)
Failed merges:
Use sort_by_cached_key where appropriate
A follow-up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/48639, converting various slice sorting calls to `sort_by_cached_key` when the key functions are more expensive.
Impressing confused Python users with magical diagnostics is perhaps
worth this not-grossly-unreasonable (only 40ish lines) extra complexity
in the parser?
Thanks to Vadim Petrochenkov for guidance.
This resolves#46836.
Expand macros in `extern {}` blocks
This permits macro and proc-macro and attribute invocations (the latter only with the `proc_macro` feature of course) in `extern {}` blocks, gated behind a new `macros_in_extern` feature.
A tracking issue is now open at #49476closes#48747
Expand Attributes on Statements and Expressions
This enables attribute-macro expansion on statements and expressions while retaining the `stmt_expr_attributes` feature requirement for attributes on expressions.
closes#41475
cc #38356 @petrochenkov @jseyfried
r? @nrc
Fix escaped backslash in windows file not found message
When a module is declared, but no matching file exists, rustc gives
an error like `help: name the file either foo.rs or foo/mod.rs inside
the directory "src/bar"`. However, at on windows, the backslash was
double-escaped when naming the directory.
It did this because the string was printed in debug mode (`"{:?}"`) to
surround it with quotes. However, it should just be printed like any
other directory in an error message and surrounded by escaped quotes,
rather than relying on the debug print to add quotes (`"\"{}\""`).
I also checked the test suite to see if this output is being correctly tested. It's not - it only tests up to the word "directory". Presumably this is so that the test is not dependent on its exact position in the source tree. I don't know a better way to test this, unless the test suite supports regex?
When a module is declared, but no matching file exists, rustc gives
an error like 'help: name the file either foo.rs or foo/mod.rs inside
the directory "src/bar"'. However, at on windows, the backslash was
double-escaped when naming the directory.
It did this because the string was printed in debug mode ( "{:?}" ) to
surround it with quotes. However, it should just be printed like any
other directory in an error message and surrounded by escaped quotes,
rather than relying on the debug print to add quotes ( "\"{}\"" ).
