Suggest defining variable as mutable on `&mut _` type mismatch in pats
Suggest writing `mut a` where `&mut a` was written but a non-ref type provided.
Since we still don't have "apply either one of the suggestions but not both" kind of thing, the interaction with the suggestion of removing `&[mut]` or moving it to the type is weird, and idk how to make it better..
r? ``@compiler-errors``
Reverse folder hierarchy
#91318 introduced a trait for infallible folders distinct from the fallible version. For some reason (completely unfathomable to me now that I look at it with fresh eyes), the infallible trait was a supertrait of the fallible one: that is, all fallible folders were required to also be infallible. Moreover the `Error` associated type was defined on the infallible trait! It's so absurd that it has me questioning whether I was entirely sane.
This trait reverses the hierarchy, so that the fallible trait is a supertrait of the infallible one: all infallible folders are required to also be fallible (which is a trivial blanket implementation). This of course makes much more sense! It also enables the `Error` associated type to sit on the fallible trait, where it sensibly belongs.
There is one downside however: folders expose a `tcx` accessor method. Since the blanket fallible implementation for infallible folders only has access to a generic `F: TypeFolder`, we need that trait to expose such an accessor to which we can delegate. Alternatively it's possible to extract that accessor into a separate `HasTcx` trait (or similar) that would then be a supertrait of both the fallible and infallible folder traits: this would ensure that there's only one unambiguous `tcx` method, at the cost of a little additional boilerplate. If desired, I can submit that as a separate PR.
r? ````@jackh726````
Now that typed identifiers are used in both derives, constructors for
the `DiagnosticMessage` and `SubdiagnosticMessage` types are not
required.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
As in the diagnostic derive, using typed identifiers in the
subdiagnostic derive improves the diagnostics of using the subdiagnostic
derive as Fluent messages will be confirmed to exist at compile-time.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Using typed identifiers instead of strings with the Fluent identifier
enables the diagnostic derive to benefit from the compile-time
validation that comes with typed identifiers - use of a non-existent
Fluent identifier will not compile.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Fixup missing renames from `#[main]` to `#[rustc_main]`
In #84217 `#[main]` was removed and replaced with `#[rustc_main]`. In some places the rename was forgotten, which makes the current code confusing, because at first glance it seems that `#[main]` is still around. Perform the renames also in these places.
I noticed this (after first being confused by it) when working on #97802.
r? `@petrochenkov`
(since you reviewed the other PR)
Improve suggestion for calling fn-like expr on type mismatch
1.) Suggest calling values of with RPIT types (and probably TAIT) when we expect `Ty` and have `impl Fn() -> Ty`
2.) Suggest calling closures even when they're not assigned to a local variable first
3.) Drive-by fix of a pretty-printing bug (`impl Fn()-> Ty` => `impl Fn() -> Ty`)
r? ```@estebank```
rustc_target: Remove some redundant target properties
`is_like_emscripten` is equivalent to `os == "emscripten"`, so it's removed.
`is_like_fuchsia` is equivalent to `os == "fuchsia"`, so it's removed.
`is_like_osx` also falls into the same category and is equivalent to `vendor == "apple"`, but it's commonly used so I kept it as is for now.
`is_like_(solaris,windows,wasm)` are combinations of different operating systems or architectures (see compiler/rustc_target/src/spec/tests/tests_impl.rs) so they are also kept as is.
I think `is_like_wasm` (and maybe `is_like_osx`) are sufficiently closed sets, so we can remove these fields as well and replace them with methods like `fn is_like_wasm() { arch == "wasm32" || arch == "wasm64" }`.
On other hand, `is_like_solaris` and `is_like_windows` are sufficiently open and I can imagine custom targets introducing other values for `os`.
This is kind of a gray area.
Remove (transitive) reliance on sorting by DefId in pretty-printer
This moves us a step closer to removing the `PartialOrd/`Ord` impls
for `DefId`. See #90317
Add macro support in jump to definition feature
Fixes#91174.
To do so, I check if the span comes from an expansion, and if so, I infer the original macro `DefId` or `Span` depending if it's a defined in the current crate or not.
There is one limitation due to macro expansion though:
```rust
macro_rules! yolo { () => {}}
fn foo() {
yolo!();
}
```
In `foo`, `yolo!` won't be linked because after expansion, it is replaced by nothing (which seems logical). So I can't get an item from the `Visitor` from which I could tell if its `Span` comes from an expansion.
I added a test for this specific limitation alongside others.
Demo: https://rustdoc.crud.net/imperio/macro-jump-to-def/src/foo/check-source-code-urls-to-def-std.rs.html
As for the empty macro issue that cannot create a jump to definition, you can see it [here](https://rustdoc.crud.net/imperio/macro-jump-to-def/src/foo/check-source-code-urls-to-def-std.rs.html#35).
r? ```@jyn514```
fix universes in the NLL type tests
In the NLL code, we were not accommodating universes in the
`type_test` logic.
Fixes#98095.
r? `@compiler-errors`
This breaks some tests, however, so the purpose of this branch is more explanatory and perhaps to do a crater run.
This commit adds new methods that combine sequences of existing
formatting methods.
- `Formatter::debug_{tuple,struct}_field[12345]_finish`, equivalent to a
`Formatter::debug_{tuple,struct}` + N x `Debug{Tuple,Struct}::field` +
`Debug{Tuple,Struct}::finish` call sequence.
- `Formatter::debug_{tuple,struct}_fields_finish` is similar, but can
handle any number of fields by using arrays.
These new methods are all marked as `doc(hidden)` and unstable. They are
intended for the compiler's own use.
Special-casing up to 5 fields gives significantly better performance
results than always using arrays (as was tried in #95637).
The commit also changes the `Debug` deriving code to use these new methods. For
example, where the old `Debug` code for a struct with two fields would be like
this:
```
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut ::core::fmt::Formatter) -> ::core::fmt::Result {
match *self {
Self {
f1: ref __self_0_0,
f2: ref __self_0_1,
} => {
let debug_trait_builder = &mut ::core::fmt::Formatter::debug_struct(f, "S2");
let _ = ::core::fmt::DebugStruct::field(debug_trait_builder, "f1", &&(*__self_0_0));
let _ = ::core::fmt::DebugStruct::field(debug_trait_builder, "f2", &&(*__self_0_1));
::core::fmt::DebugStruct::finish(debug_trait_builder)
}
}
}
```
the new code is like this:
```
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut ::core::fmt::Formatter) -> ::core::fmt::Result {
match *self {
Self {
f1: ref __self_0_0,
f2: ref __self_0_1,
} => ::core::fmt::Formatter::debug_struct_field2_finish(
f,
"S2",
"f1",
&&(*__self_0_0),
"f2",
&&(*__self_0_1),
),
}
}
```
This shrinks the code produced for `Debug` instances
considerably, reducing compile times and binary sizes.
Co-authored-by: Scott McMurray <scottmcm@users.noreply.github.com>
implement `iter_projections` function on `PlaceRef`
this makes the api more flexible. the original function now calls the PlaceRef
version to avoid duplicating the code.
Update no_default_libraries handling for emscripten target
```@sbc100``` says:
> `-sDEFAULT_LIBRARY_FUNCS_TO_INCLUDE=[]` is almost certainly wrong/out-of-date. This setting defaults to the empty list anyway these days so its redundant. Also we now support `-nodefaultlibs` so you can use that, as with other toolchains.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/98303#issuecomment-1162163684
Migrate two diagnostics from the `rustc_builtin_macros` crate
Migrate two diagnostics to use the struct derive and be translatable.
r? ```@davidtwco```
Provide a `PathSegment.res` in more cases
I find that in many cases, the `res` associated with a `PathSegment` is `Res::Err` even though the path was fully resolved. A few diagnostics use this `res` and their error messages suffer because of the lack of resolved segment.
This fixes it a bit, but it's obviously not complete and I'm not exactly sure if it's correct.
Greatly improve error reporting for futures and generators in `note_obligation_cause_code`
Most futures don't go through this code path, because they're caught by
`maybe_note_obligation_cause_for_async_await`. But all generators do,
and `maybe_note` is imperfect and doesn't catch all futures. Improve the error message for those it misses.
At some point, we may want to consider unifying this with the code for `maybe_note_async_await`,
so that `async_await` notes all parent constraints, and `note_obligation` can point to yield points.
But both functions are quite complicated, and it's not clear to me how to combine them;
this seems like a good incremental improvement.
Helps with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97332.
r? ``@estebank`` cc ``@eholk`` ``@compiler-errors``
In fc357039f9 `#[main]` was removed and replaced with `#[rustc_main]`.
In some place the rename was forgotten, which makes the current code
confusing, because at first glance it seems that `#[main]` is still
around. Perform the renames also in these places.
Older llvm has the pre-C++17 restriction on success and failure memory
ordering, requiring the former to be at least as strong as the latter.
So, for llvm 12, this upgrades the success ordering to a stronger one if
necessary.
Create elided lifetime parameters for function-like types
Split from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97720
This PR refactor lifetime generic parameters in bare function types and parenthesized traits to introduce the additional required lifetimes as fresh parameters in a `for<>` bound.
This PR does the same to lifetimes appearing in closure signatures, and as-if introducing `for<>` bounds on closures (without the associated change in semantics).
r? `@petrochenkov`
Point at return expression for RPIT-related error
Certainly this needs some diagnostic refining, but I wanted to show that it was possible first and foremost. Not sure if this is the right approach. Open to feedback.
Fixes#80583
use `def_ident_span` , `body_owner_def_id` instead of `in_progress_typeck_results`, `guess_head_span`
use `body_id.owner` directly
add description to label
This comment is out dated and misleading, the arm is about TAITs
r? ```@oli-obk```
```@oli-obk``` unsure if you want to add a different comment of some sort.
```@bors``` rollup=always
Remove the unused-`#[doc(hidden)]` logic from the `unused_attributes` lint
Fixes#96890.
It was found out that `#[doc(hidden)]` on trait impl items does indeed have an effect on the generated documentation (see the linked issue). In my opinion and the one of [others](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/266220-rustdoc/topic/Validy.20checks.20for.20.60.23.5Bdoc.28hidden.29.5D.60/near/281846219), rustdoc's output is actually a bit flawed in that regard but that should be tracked in a new issue I suppose (I will open an issue for that in the near future).
The check was introduced in #96008 which is marked to be part of version `1.62` (current `beta`). As far as I understand, this means that **this PR needs to be backported** to `beta` to fix#96890 on time. Correct me if I am wrong.
CC `@dtolnay` (in case you would like to agree or disagree with my decision to fully remove this check)
`@rustbot` label A-lint T-compiler T-rustdoc
r? `@rust-lang/compiler`
lub: don't bail out due to empty binders
allows for the following to compile. The equivalent code using `struct Wrapper<'upper>(fn(&'upper ());` already compiles on stable.
```rust
let _: fn(&'upper ()) = match v {
true => lt_in_fn::<'a>(),
false => lt_in_fn::<'b>(),
};
```
see https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=7034a677190110941223cafac6632f70 for a complete example
r? ```@rust-lang/types```
#91318 introduced a trait for infallible folders distinct from the fallible version. For some reason (completely unfathomable to me now that I look at it with fresh eyes), the infallible trait was a supertrait of the fallible one: that is, all fallible folders were required to also be infallible. Moreover the `Error` associated type was defined on the infallible trait! It's so absurd that it has me questioning whether I was entirely sane.
This trait reverses the hierarchy, so that the fallible trait is a supertrait of the infallible one: all infallible folders are required to also be fallible (which is a trivial blanket implementation). This of course makes much more sense! It also enables the `Error` associated type to sit on the fallible trait, where it sensibly belongs.
There is one downside however: folders expose a `tcx` accessor method. Since the blanket fallible implementation for infallible folders only has access to a generic `F: TypeFolder`, we need that trait to expose such an accessor to which we can delegate. Alternatively it's possible to extract that accessor into a separate `HasTcx` trait (or similar) that would then be a supertrait of both the fallible and infallible folder traits: this would ensure that there's only one unambiguous `tcx` method, at the cost of a little additional boilerplate. If desired, I can submit that as a separate PR.
r? @jackh726
Remove the source archive functionality of ArchiveWriter
We now build archives through strictly additive means rather than taking an existing archive and potentially substracting parts. This is simpler and makes it easier to swap out the archive writer in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97485.
`try_fold_unevaluated` for infallible folders
#97447 added folding of unevaluated constants, but did not include an override of the default (fallible) operation in the blanket impl of `FallibleTypeFolder` for infallible folders. Here we provide that missing override.
r? ```@nnethercote```
Fix erroneous span for borrowck error
I am not confident that this is the correct fix, but it does the job. Open to suggestions for a real fix instead.
Fixes#97997
The issue is that we pass a [dummy location](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/src/rustc_middle/mir/visit.rs.html#302) when type-checking the ["required consts"](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/mir/struct.Body.html#structfield.required_consts) that are needed by the MIR body during borrowck. This means that when we fail to evaluate the constant, we use the span of `bb0[0]`, instead of the actual span of the constant.
There are quite a few other places that use `START_BLOCK.start_location()`, `Location::START`, etc. when calling for a random/unspecified `Location` value. This is because, unlike (for example) `Span`, we don't have a dummy/miscellaneous value to use instead. I would appreciate guidance (either in this PR, or a follow-up) on what needs to be done to clean this up in general.
Add proper tracing spans to rustc_trait_selection::traits::error_reporting
While I was trying to figure out #97704 I did some of this to make the logs more legible, so I figured I'd do the whole module and open a PR with it. afaict this is an ongoing process in the compiler from the log->tracing transition? but lmk if there was a reason for the more verbose forms of logging as they are.
Also, for some of the functions with only one log in them, I put the function name as a message for that log instead of `#[instrument]`-ing the whole function with a span? but maybe the latter would actually be preferable, I'm not actually sure.
