Rewrite exhaustiveness in one pass
This is at least my 4th attempt at this in as many years x) Previous attempts were all too complicated or too slow. But we're finally here!
The previous version of the exhaustiveness algorithm computed reachability for each arm then exhaustiveness of the whole match. Since each of these steps does roughly the same things, this rewrites the algorithm to do them all in one go. I also think this makes things much simpler.
I also rewrote the documentation of the algorithm in depth. Hopefully it's up-to-date and easier to follow now. Plz comment if anything's unclear.
r? `@oli-obk` I think you're one of the rare other people to understand the exhaustiveness algorithm?
cc `@varkor` I know you're not active anymore, but if you feel like having a look you might enjoy this :D
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/79307
By default, `newtype_index!` types get a default `Encodable`/`Decodable`
impl. You can opt out of this with `custom_encodable`. Opting out is the
opposite to how Rust normally works with autogenerated (derived) impls.
This commit inverts the behaviour, replacing `custom_encodable` with
`encodable` which opts into the default `Encodable`/`Decodable` impl.
Only 23 of the 59 `newtype_index!` occurrences need `encodable`.
Even better, there were eight crates with a dependency on
`rustc_serialize` just from unused default `Encodable`/`Decodable`
impls. This commit removes that dependency from those eight crates.
This disentangles the row-specific tracking of `parent_row` etc from the
logical operation of specialization. This means `wildcard_row` doesn't
need to provide dummy values for `parent_row` etc anymore.
interpret: simplify handling of shifts by no longer trying to handle signed and unsigned shift amounts in the same branch
While we're at it, also update comments in codegen and MIR building related to shifts, and fix the overflow error printed by Miri on negative shift amounts.
Build pre-coroutine-transform coroutine body on error
I was accidentally building the post-transform coroutine body, rather than the pre-transform coroutine body. There's no pinning expected here yet, and the return type isn't yet transformed into `CoroutineState`.
Fixes#117670
Custom MIR: Support cleanup blocks
Cleanup blocks are declared with `bb (cleanup) = { ... }`.
`Call` and `Drop` terminators take an additional argument describing the unwind action, which is one of the following:
* `UnwindContinue()`
* `UnwindUnreachable()`
* `UnwindTerminate(reason)`, where reason is `ReasonAbi` or `ReasonInCleanup`
* `UnwindCleanup(block)`
Also support unwind resume and unwind terminate terminators:
* `UnwindResume()`
* `UnwindTerminate(reason)`
Cleanup blocks are declared with `bb (cleanup) = { ... }`.
`Call` and `Drop` terminators take an additional argument describing the
unwind action, which is one of the following:
* `UnwindContinue()`
* `UnwindUnreachable()`
* `UnwindTerminate(reason)`, where reason is `ReasonAbi` or `ReasonInCleanup`
* `UnwindCleanup(block)`
Also support unwind resume and unwind terminate terminators:
* `UnwindResume()`
* `UnwindTerminate(reason)`
generator layout: ignore fake borrows
fixes#117059
We emit fake shallow borrows in case the scrutinee place uses a `Deref` and there is a match guard. This is necessary to prevent the match guard from mutating the scrutinee: fab1054e17/compiler/rustc_mir_build/src/build/matches/mod.rs (L1250-L1265)
These fake borrows end up impacting the generator witness computation in `mir_generator_witnesses`, which causes the issue in #117059. This PR now completely ignores fake borrows during this computation. This is sound as thse are always removed after analysis and the actual computation of the generator layout happens afterwards.
Only the second commit impacts behavior, and could be backported by itself.
r? types
patterns: reject raw pointers that are not just integers
Matching against `0 as *const i32` is fine, matching against `&42 as *const i32` is not.
This extends the existing check against function pointers and wide pointers: we now uniformly reject all these pointer types during valtree construction, and then later lint because of that. See [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116930#issuecomment-1784654073) for some more explanation and context.
Also fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116929.
Cc `@oli-obk` `@lcnr`
Thir unsafeck fixes
- Recognise thread local statics in THIR unsafeck
- Add suggestion for unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn
- Fix unsafe checking of let expressions
Cleanup `rustc_mir_build/../check_match.rs`
The file had become pretty unwieldy, with a fair amount of duplication. As a bonus, I discovered that we weren't running some pattern checks in if-let chains.
I recommend looking commit-by-commit. The last commit is a whim, I think it makes more sense that way but I don't hold this opinion strongly.
Support enum variants in offset_of!
This MR implements support for navigating through enum variants in `offset_of!`, placing the enum variant name in the second argument to `offset_of!`. The RFC placed it in the first argument, but I think it interacts better with nested field access in the second, as you can then write things like
```rust
offset_of!(Type, field.Variant.field)
```
Alternatively, a syntactic distinction could be made between variants and fields (e.g. `field::Variant.field`) but I'm not convinced this would be helpful.
[RFC 3308 # Enum Support](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3308-offset_of.html#enum-support-offset_ofsomeenumstructvariant-field_on_variant)
Tracking Issue #106655.
Match usize/isize exhaustively with half-open ranges
The long-awaited finale to the saga of [exhaustiveness checking for integers](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/50912)!
```rust
match 0usize {
0.. => {} // exhaustive!
}
match 0usize {
0..usize::MAX => {} // helpful error message!
}
```
Features:
- Half-open ranges behave as expected for `usize`/`isize`;
- Trying to use `0..usize::MAX` will tell you that `usize::MAX..` is missing and explain why. No more unhelpful "`_` is missing";
- Everything else stays the same.
This should unblock https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/37854.
Review-wise:
- I recommend looking commit-by-commit;
- This regresses perf because of the added complexity in `IntRange`; hopefully not too much;
- I measured each `#[inline]`, they all help a bit with the perf regression (tho I don't get why);
- I did not touch MIR building; I expect there's an easy PR there that would skip unnecessary comparisons when the range is half-open.
