Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #116267 (Some codegen cleanups around SIMD checks)
- #116712 (When encountering unclosed delimiters during lexing, check for diff markers)
- #117416 (Also consider TAIT to be uncomputable if the MIR body is tainted)
- #117421 (coverage: Replace impossible `coverage::Error` with assertions)
- #117438 (Do not ICE on constant evaluation failure in GVN.)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Also consider TAIT to be uncomputable if the MIR body is tainted
Not totally sure if this is the best solution. We could, alternatively, look at the hir typeck results and try to take a type from there instead of just falling back to type error, inferring `u8` instead of `{type error}`. Not certain it really matters, though.
Happy to iterate on this.
Fixes#117413
r? ``@oli-obk`` cc ``@Nadrieril``
Store #[deprecated] attribute's `since` value in parsed form
This PR implements the first followup bullet listed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117148#issue-1960240108.
We centralize error handling to the attribute parsing code in `compiler/rustc_attr/src/builtin.rs`, and thereby remove some awkward error codepaths from later phases of compilation that had to make sense of these #\[deprecated\] attributes, namely `compiler/rustc_passes/src/stability.rs` and `compiler/rustc_middle/src/middle/stability.rs`.
Detect object safety errors when assoc type is missing
When an associated type with GATs isn't specified in a `dyn Trait`, emit an object safety error instead of only complaining about the missing associated type, as it will lead the user down a path of three different errors before letting them know that what they were trying to do is impossible to begin with.
Fix#103155.
When an associated type with GATs isn't specified in a `dyn Trait`, emit
an object safety error instead of only complaining about the missing
associated type, as it will lead the user down a path of three different
errors before letting them know that what they were trying to do is
impossible to begin with.
Fix#103155.
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #116862 (Detect when trait is implemented for type and suggest importing it)
- #117389 (Some diagnostics improvements of `gen` blocks)
- #117396 (Don't treat closures/coroutine types as part of the public API)
- #117398 (Correctly handle nested or-patterns in exhaustiveness)
- #117403 (Poison check_well_formed if method receivers are invalid to prevent typeck from running on it)
- #117411 (Improve some diagnostics around `?Trait` bounds)
- #117414 (Don't normalize to an un-revealed opaque when we hit the recursion limit)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Don't normalize to an un-revealed opaque when we hit the recursion limit
Currently, we will normalize `Opaque := Option<&Opaque>` to something like `Option<&Option<&Option<&...Opaque>>>`, hitting a limit and bottoming out in an unnormalized opaque after the recursion limit gets hit.
Unfortunately, during `layout_of`, we'll simply recurse and try again if the type normalizes to something different than the type:
e6e931dda5/compiler/rustc_ty_utils/src/layout.rs (L58-L60)
That means then we'll try to normalize `Option<&Option<&Option<&...Opaque>>>` again, substituting `Opaque` into itself even deeper. Eventually this will get to the point that we're just stack-overflowing on a really deep type before even hitting an opaque again.
To fix this, we just bottom out into `ty::Error` instead of the unrevealed opaque type.
Fixes#117412
r? `@oli-obk`
Improve some diagnostics around `?Trait` bounds
* uses better spans
* clarifies a message that was only talking about generic params, but applies to `dyn ?Trait` and `impl ?Trait` as well
Poison check_well_formed if method receivers are invalid to prevent typeck from running on it
fixes#117379
Though if some code invokes typeck without having first invoked `check_well_formed` then we'll encounter this ICE again. This can happen in const and const fn bodies if they are evaluated due to other `check_well_formed` checks or similar
Correctly handle nested or-patterns in exhaustiveness
I had assumed nested or-patterns were flattened, and they mostly are but not always.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117378
Fix missing leading space in suggestion
For a local pattern with no space between `let` and `(` e.g.:
```rust
let(_a) = 3;
```
we were previously suggesting this illegal code:
```rust
let_a = 3;
```
After this change the suggestion will instead be:
```rust
let _a = 3;
```
Fixes#117380
C-variadic error improvements
A couple improvements for c-variadic errors:
1. Fix the bad-c-variadic error being emitted multiple times. If a function incorrectly contains multiple `...` args, and is also not foreign or `unsafe extern "C"`, only emit the latter error once rather than once per `...`.
2. Explicitly reject `const` C-variadic functions. Trying to use C-variadics in a const function would previously fail with an error like "destructor of `VaListImpl<'_>` cannot be evaluated at compile-time". Add an explicit check for const C-variadics to provide a clearer error: "functions cannot be both `const` and C-variadic". This also addresses one of the concerns in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44930: "Ensure that even when this gets stabilized for regular functions, it is still rejected on const fn."
On object safety error, mention new enum as alternative
When we encounter a `dyn Trait` that isn't object safe, look for its implementors. If there's one, mention using it directly If there are less than 9, mention the possibility of creating a new enum and using that instead.
Fix#80194.
Trying to use C-variadics in a const function would previously fail with
an error like "destructor of `VaListImpl<'_>` cannot be evaluated at
compile-time".
Add an explicit check for const C-variadics to provide a clearer error:
"functions cannot be both `const` and C-variadic".
For a local pattern with no space between `let` and `(` e.g.:
let(_a) = 3;
we were previously suggesting this illegal code:
let_a =3;
After this change the suggestion will instead be:
let _a =3;
(Note the space after `let`)
Fail typeck for illegal break-with-value
This is fixes the issue wherein typeck was succeeding for break-with-value exprs at illegal locations such as inside `while`, `while let` and `for` loops which eventually caused an ICE during MIR interpretation for const eval.
Now we fail typeck for such code which prevents faulty MIR from being generated and interpreted, thus fixing the ICE.
Fixes#114529
Ignore RPIT duplicated lifetimes in `opaque_types_defined_by`
An RPIT's or TAIT's own generics are kinda useless -- so just ignore them. For TAITs, they will always be empty, and for RPITs, they're always duplicated lifetimes.
Fixes#115013.
Allows `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes to have multiple
notes
This commit extends the `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` (and `#[rustc_on_unimplemented]`) attributes to allow multiple `note` options. This enables emitting multiple notes for custom error messages. For now I've opted to not change any of the existing usages of `#[rustc_on_unimplemented]` and just updated the relevant compile tests.
r? `@compiler-errors`
I'm happy to adjust any of the existing changed location to emit the old error message if that's desired.
This is fixes the issue wherein typeck was succeeding for break-with-value
at illegal locations such as inside `while`, `while let` and `for` loops which
eventually caused an ICE during MIR interpetation for const eval.
Now we fail typeck for such code which prevents faulty MIR from being generated
and interpreted, thus fixing the ICE.
When we encounter a `dyn Trait` that isn't object safe, look for its
implementors. If there's one, mention using it directly If there are
less than 9, mention the possibility of creating a new enum and using
that instead.
Account for object unsafe `impl Trait on dyn Trait {}`. Make a
distinction between public and sealed traits.
Fix#80194.
Consider alias bounds when computing liveness in NLL (but this time sound hopefully)
This is a revival of #116040, except removing the changes to opaque lifetime captures check to make sure that we're not triggering any unsoundness due to the lack of general existential regions and the currently-existing `ReErased` hack we use instead.
r? `@aliemjay` -- I appreciate you pointing out the unsoundenss in the previous iteration of this PR, and I'd like to hear that you're happy with this iteration of this PR before this goes back into FCP :>
Fixes#116794 as well
---
(mostly copied from #116040 and reworked slightly)
# Background
Right now, liveness analysis in NLL is a bit simplistic. It simply walks through all of the regions of a type and marks them as being live at points. This is problematic in the case of aliases, since it requires that we mark **all** of the regions in their args[^1] as live, leading to bugs like #42940.
In reality, we may be able to deduce that fewer regions are allowed to be present in the projected type (or "hidden type" for opaques) via item bounds or where clauses, and therefore ideally, we should be able to soundly require fewer regions to be live in the alias.
For example:
```rust
trait Captures<'a> {}
impl<T> Captures<'_> for T {}
fn capture<'o>(_: &'o mut ()) -> impl Sized + Captures<'o> + 'static {}
fn test_two_mut(mut x: ()) {
let _f1 = capture(&mut x);
let _f2 = capture(&mut x);
//~^ ERROR cannot borrow `x` as mutable more than once at a time
}
```
In the example above, we should be able to deduce from the `'static` bound on `capture`'s opaque that even though `'o` is a captured region, it *can never* show up in the opaque's hidden type, and can soundly be ignored for liveness purposes.
# The Fix
We apply a simple version of RFC 1214's `OutlivesProjectionEnv` and `OutlivesProjectionTraitDef` rules to NLL's `make_all_regions_live` computation.
Specifically, when we encounter an alias type, we:
1. Look for a unique outlives bound in the param-env or item bounds for that alias. If there is more than one unique region, bail, unless any of the outlives bound's regions is `'static`, and in that case, prefer `'static`. If we find such a unique region, we can mark that outlives region as live and skip walking through the args of the opaque.
2. Otherwise, walk through the alias's args recursively, as we do today.
## Limitation: Multiple choices
This approach has some limitations. Firstly, since liveness doesn't use the same type-test logic as outlives bounds do, we can't really try several options when we're faced with a choice.
If we encounter two unique outlives regions in the param-env or bounds, we simply fall back to walking the opaque via its args. I expect this to be mostly mitigated by the special treatment of `'static`, and can be fixed in a forwards-compatible by a more sophisticated analysis in the future.
## Limitation: Opaque hidden types
Secondly, we do not employ any of these rules when considering whether the regions captured by a hidden type are valid. That causes this code (cc #42940) to fail:
```rust
trait Captures<'a> {}
impl<T> Captures<'_> for T {}
fn a() -> impl Sized + 'static {
b(&vec![])
}
fn b<'o>(_: &'o Vec<i32>) -> impl Sized + Captures<'o> + 'static {}
```
We need to have existential regions to avoid [unsoundness](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116040#issuecomment-1751628189) when an opaque captures a region which is not represented in its own substs but which outlives a region that does.
## Read more
Context: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115822#issuecomment-1731153952 (for the liveness case)
More context: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/42940#issuecomment-455198309 (for the opaque capture case, which this does not fix)
[^1]: except for bivariant region args in opaques, which will become less relevant when we move onto edition 2024 capture semantics for opaques.
