FIX - ambiguous Diagnostic link in docs
UPDATE - rename diagnostic_items to IntoDiagnostic and AddToDiagnostic
[Gardening] FIX - formatting via `x fmt`
FIX - rebase conflicts. NOTE: Confirm wheather or not we want to handle TargetDataLayoutErrorsWrapper this way
DELETE - unneeded allow attributes in Handler method
FIX - broken test
FIX - Rebase conflict
UPDATE - rename residual _SessionDiagnostic and fix LintDiag link
On later stages, the feature is already stable.
Result of running:
rg -l "feature.let_else" compiler/ src/librustdoc/ library/ | xargs sed -s -i "s#\\[feature.let_else#\\[cfg_attr\\(bootstrap, feature\\(let_else\\)#"
- ... when creating diagnostics in rustc_metadata
- use the error_code! macro
- pass macro output to diag.code()
- use fluent from within manual implementation of SessionDiagnostic
- emit the untested errors in case they occur in the wild
- stop panicking in the probably-not-dead code, add fixme to write test
Make call suggestions more general and more accurate
Cleans up some suggestions that have to do with adding `()` to make typeck happy.
1. Drive-by rename of `expr_t` to `base_ty` since it's the type of the `base_expr`
1. Autoderef until we get to a callable type in `suggest_fn_call`.
1. Don't erroneously suggest calling constructor when a method/field does not exist on it.
1. Suggest calling a method receiver if its function output has a method (e.g. `fn.method()` => `fn().method()`)
1. Extend call suggestions to type parameters, fn pointers, trait objects where possible
1. Suggest calling in operators too (fixes#101054)
1. Use `/* {ty} */` as argument placeholder instead of just `_`, which is confusing and makes suggestions look less like `if let` syntax.
Allow deriving multipart suggestions
This turned into a bit more of a rewrite than I was initially hoping for... Still, I think the `SessionSubdiagnostic` derive is a little cleaner overall now, and closer to the `SessionDiagnostic` derive to make future code sharing easier.
r? ``@davidtwco``
Reenable disabled early syntax gates as future-incompatibility lints
- MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/535
The approach taken by this PR is
- Introduce a new lint, `unstable_syntax_pre_expansion`, and reenable the early syntax gates to emit it
- Use the diagnostic stashing mechanism to stash warnings the early warnings
- When the hard error occurs post expansion, steal and cancel the early warning
- Don't display any stashed warnings if errors are present to avoid the same noise problem that hiding type ascription errors is avoiding
Commits are working commits, but in a coherent steps-to-implement manner. Can be squashed if desired.
The preexisting `soft_unstable` lint seems like it would've been a good fit, but it is deny-by-default (appropriate for `#[bench]`) and these gates should be introduced as warn-by-default.
It may be desirable to change the stash mechanism's behavior to not flush lint errors in the presence of other errors either (like is done for warnings here), but upgrading a stash-using lint from warn to error perhaps is enough of a request to see the lint that they shouldn't be hidden; additionally, fixing the last error to get new errors thrown at you always feels bad, so if we know the lint errors are present, we should show them.
Using a new flag/mechanism for a "weak diagnostic" which is suppressed by other errors may also be desirable over assuming any stashed warnings are "weak," but this is the first user of stashing warnings and seems an appropriate use of stashing (it follows the "know more later to refine the diagnostic" pattern; here we learn that it's in a compiled position) so we get to define what it means to stash a non-hard-error diagnostic.
cc `````@petrochenkov````` (seconded MCP)
never consider unsafe blocks unused if they would be required with deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)
Judging from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71668#issuecomment-1200317370 the consensus nowadays seems to be that we should never consider an unsafe block unused if it was required with `deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)`, no matter whether that lint is actually enabled or not. So let's adjust rustc accordingly.
The first commit does the change, the 2nd does some cleanup.
Migrations for rustc_expand transcribe.rs
This PR includes some migrations to the new diagnostics API for the `rustc_expand` module.
r? ```@davidtwco```
triagebot: add translation-related mention groups
- Move some code around so that triagebot can ping relevant parties when translation logic is modified.
- Add mention groups to triagebot for translation-related files/folders.
- Auto-label pull requests with changes to translation-related files/folders with `A-translation`.
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
Just moving code around so that triagebot can ping relevant parties when
translation logic is modified.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
If a primary bundle doesn't contain a message then the fallback bundle
is used. However, if the primary bundle's message is broken (e.g. it
refers to a interpolated variable that the compiler isn't providing)
then this would just result in a compiler panic. While there aren't any
primary bundles right now, this is the type of issue that could come up
once translation is further along.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Stabilize backtrace
This PR stabilizes the std::backtrace module. As of #99431, the std::Error::backtrace item has been removed, and so the rest of the backtrace feature is set to be stabilized.
Previous discussion can be found in #72981, #3156.
Stabilized API summary:
```rust
pub mod std {
pub mod backtrace {
pub struct Backtrace { }
pub enum BacktraceStatus {
Unsupported,
Disabled,
Captured,
}
impl fmt::Debug for Backtrace {}
impl Backtrace {
pub fn capture() -> Backtrace;
pub fn force_capture() -> Backtrace;
pub const fn disabled() -> Backtrace;
pub fn status(&self) -> BacktraceStatus;
}
impl fmt::Display for Backtrace {}
}
}
```
`@yaahc`
