rustbuild: don't create a source tarball when installing
This splits Install out of Dist as it is not a full dist anymore, and creates the source tarball only for the Dist command.
This will allow splitting install in a few rules if we want as it's done for other phases.
Use the improved submodule handling
r? @alexcrichton
That was a crap...
```
Updating submodules
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./x.py", line 20, in <module>
bootstrap.main()
File "/home/ishitatsuyuki/Documents/rust/src/bootstrap/bootstrap.py", line 684, in main
bootstrap()
File "/home/ishitatsuyuki/Documents/rust/src/bootstrap/bootstrap.py", line 662, in bootstrap
rb.update_submodules()
File "/home/ishitatsuyuki/Documents/rust/src/bootstrap/bootstrap.py", line 566, in update_submodules
path = line[1:].split(' ')[1]
TypeError: a bytes-like object is required, not 'str'
```
Maybe we need to confirm the compatibility of git options, such as `git config` or `git -C` (I believe they existed long before, though). This is tested locally.
Fix 'associate type' typo
I came across an error message mentioning an 'associate type'.
Since this is the only instance of this term in rustc (it's 'associated type' everywhere else), I think this might be a typo.
Make assignments to `Copy` union fields safe
This is an accompanying PR to PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/42068 stabilizing FFI unions.
This was first proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/32836#issuecomment-281296416, see subsequent comments as well.
Assignments to `Copy` union fields do not read any data from the union and are [equivalent](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/32836#issuecomment-281660298) to whole union assignments, which are safe, so they should be safe as well. This removes a significant number of "false positive" unsafe blocks, in code dealing with FFI unions in particular.
It desirable to make this change now, together with stabilization of FFI unions, because now it affecfts only unstable code, but later it will cause warnings/errors caused by `unused_unsafe` lint in stable code.
cc #32836
r? @nikomatsakis
add thiscall calling convention support
This support is needed for bindgen to work well on 32-bit Windows, and also enables people to begin experimenting with C++ FFI support on that platform.
Fixes#42044.
Initial implementation of declarative macros 2.0
Implement declarative macros 2.0 (rust-lang/rfcs#1584) behind `#![feature(decl_macro)]`.
Differences from `macro_rules!` include:
- new syntax: `macro m(..) { .. }` instead of `macro_rules! m { (..) => { .. } }`
- declarative macros are items:
```rust
// crate A:
pub mod foo {
m!(); // use before definition; declaration order is irrelevant
pub macro m() {} // `pub`, `pub(super)`, etc. work
}
fn main() {
foo::m!(); // named like other items
{ use foo::m as n; n!(); } // imported like other items
}
pub use foo::m; // re-exported like other items
// crate B:
extern crate A; // no need for `#[macro_use]`
A::foo::m!(); A::m!();
```
- Racket-like hygiene for items, imports, methods, fields, type parameters, privacy, etc.
- Intuitively, names in a macro definition are resolved in the macro definition's scope, not the scope in which the macro is used.
- This [explaination](http://beautifulracket.com/explainer/hygiene.html) of hygiene for Racket applies here (except for the "Breaking Hygiene" section). I wrote a similar [explanation](https://github.com/jseyfried/rfcs/blob/hygiene/text/0000-hygiene.md) for Rust.
- Generally speaking, if `fn f() { <body> }` resolves, `pub macro m() { <body> } ... m!()` also resolves, even if `m!()` is in a separate crate.
- `::foo::bar` in a `macro` behaves like `$crate::foo::bar` in a `macro_rules!`, except it can access everything visible from the `macro` (thus more permissive).
- See [`src/test/{run-pass, compile-fail}/hygiene`](afe7d89858) for examples. Small example:
```rust
mod foo {
fn f() { println!("hello world"); }
pub macro m() { f(); }
}
fn main() { foo::m!(); }
```
Limitations:
- This does not address planned changes to matchers (`expr`,`ty`, etc.), c.f. #26361.
- Lints (including stability and deprecation) and `unsafe` are not hygienic.
- adding hygiene here will be mostly or entirely backwards compatible
- Nested macro definitions (a `macro` inside another `macro`) don't always work correctly when invoked from external crates.
- pending improvements in how we encode macro definitions in crate metadata
- There is no way to "escape" hygiene without using a procedural macro.
r? @nrc
Update OpenSSL download location
In rustbuild itself we download from our mirror but in the containers we don't
do this yet. The OpenSSL download url changes from time to time (it breaks when
they release a new version) so let's download from our mirror instead.
In rustbuild itself we download from our mirror but in the containers we don't
do this yet. The OpenSSL download url changes from time to time (it breaks when
they release a new version) so let's download from our mirror instead.
Refactor: Move the mutable parts out of LintStore. Fix#42007.
* #42007 happens because the `Session` `LintStore` is emptied when linting.
* The `Session` `LintStore` is emptied because the checker (`Early`/`LateContext`) wants ownership.
* The checker wants ownership because it wants to mutate the pass objects and lint levels.
The ownership of the whole store is not essential, only the lint levels and pass objects need to be owned. Therefore, these parts are extracted out of the `LintStore` into a separate structure `LintSession`. The "check crates" methods can operate on `&mut LintSession` instead of `&mut LintStore`.
This is a minor *breaking change* for lint writers since the `LintContext` trait is changed: the `mut_lints` and `level_stack` methods are removed. But no one outside of `librustc/lint/context.rs` is using these functions, so it should be safe.
