Rollup of 4 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #131391 (Stabilize `isqrt` feature)
- #132248 (rustc_transmute: Directly use types from rustc_abi)
- #132252 (compiler: rename LayoutS to LayoutData)
- #132253 (Known-bug test for `keyword_idents` lint not propagating to other files)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Known-bug test for `keyword_idents` lint not propagating to other files
Known-bug test for `keyword_idents` lint not propagating to other files when configured via attribute (#132218).
compiler: rename LayoutS to LayoutData
Bid `LayoutS` goodbye because it looks like a typo.
`LayoutS` is the last of the types that use the "`{TypeName}` is the interned type, `{TypeName}S` is the backing data that is interned" convention. This is pretty confusing to those not intimately familiar with the history of rustc's names for its types over time, and doubly so now that there are no other examples in the tree. Abolish this convention.
fix various linker warnings
separated out from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119286; this doesn't have anything user-facing, i just want to land these changes so i can stop rebasing them.
r? `@bjorn3`
Remove `ObligationCause::span()` method
I think it's an incredibly confusing footgun to expose both `obligation_cause.span` and `obligation_cause.span()`. Especially because `ObligationCause::span()` (the method) seems to just be hacking around a single quirk in the way we set up obligation causes for match arms.
First commit removes the need for that hack, with only one diagnostic span changing (but IMO not really getting worse -- I'd argue that it was already confusing).
error on alignments greater than `isize::MAX`
Fixes#131122
On zulip someone had a concern that it was legal to create a type with alignment `isize::MAX + 1`, but I do not believe this should be allowed for `repr(align)`, as `repr(align)` also increases the *size* of the type, and that would be larger than the maximum allowed size of objects.
(cc `@workingjubilee` #131276)
Make clearer that guarantees in ABI compatibility are for Rust only
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132136#issuecomment-2439737631 -- it looks like we already had a note that I missed in my initial look here, but this goes further to emphasize the guarantees, including uplifting it to the top of the general documentation.
r? `@RalfJung`
Depend on rustc_abi in compiler crates that use it indirectly but have
not yet taken on that dependency, and are not entangled in my other PRs.
This leaves an "excise rustc_target" step after the dust settles.
Much like the previous commit.
I think the removal of "the token" in each message is fine here. There
are many more error messages that mention tokens without saying "the
token" than those that do say it.
