The original test program exercised the (garbage-collected heap)
allocation form `box (GC) ...`, feeding an instance of `Structure` in
as the expression. This obviously went away when `GC` went away, but
there's no reason for us not to include an appropriate unit test here
for the same form, just for heap-allocated instances of `Structure`.
The two tests are separate since the current implementation performs
the feature gate checks at distinct phases in the compilation, with an
`abort_if_errors` calls separating them.
Even after expansion, the generated expressions still track depth of
such pushes (i.e. how often you have "pushed" without a corresponding
"pop"), and we add a rule that in a context with a positive
`push_unsafe!` depth, it is effectively an `unsafe` block context.
(This way, we can inject code that uses `unsafe` features, but still
contains within it a sub-expression that should inherit the outer
safety checking setting, outside of the injected code.)
This is a total hack; it not only needs a feature-gate, but probably
should be feature-gated forever (if possible).
ignore-pretty in test/run-pass/pushpop-unsafe-okay.rs
The "hint" mechanism is essentially used as a workaround to compute
types for expressions which have not yet been type-checked. This
commit clarifies that usage, and limits the effects to the places
where it is currently necessary.
Fixes#26210.
Currently you can hit a link error on MSVC by only referencing static items from
a crate (no functions for example) and then link to the crate statically (as all
Rust crates do 99% of the time). A detailed investigation can be found [on
github][details], but the tl;dr is that we need to stop applying dllimport so
aggressively.
This commit alters the application of dllimport on constants to only cases where
the crate the constant originated from will be linked as a dylib in some output
crate type. That way if we're just linking rlibs (like the motivation for this
issue) we won't use dllimport. For the compiler, however, (which has lots of
dylibs) we'll use dllimport.
[details]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/26591#issuecomment-123513631
cc #26591
This test attempts to exercise cyclic structure in much of `std::collections`
(as much as is possible; e.g. things like `EnumSet` and `BitVec` do not really support carrying references at all, so trying to represent cyclic structure within them dooes not really make sense.)
This work should land before we make future revisions to `dropck`; that is, I am attempting to catch potential regressions to cases where we supported cyclic structure circa Rust 1.2.
Fixes#25343
To be honest I'm not sure if this is the right fix (I haven't yet fully understood the code),
but it seems to work. I'll look closer at the code when I have some time, in the meantime if this
is the right fix it would be nice to get verification from someone who does understand the code 😄
r? @pnkfelix
r? @eddyb
Adding new variants is annoying as one needs to modify all these places that **don't** handle the new variant.
I chose not to use `Display` as I don't think it is appropriate.
(as much as is possible; e.g. things like `EnumSet` and `BitVec` do
not really support carrying references at all, so trying to represent
cyclic structure within them dooes not really make sense.)
This fixes a couple of bugs visible on https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/marker/trait.Sync.html . For example:
* `impl<T> Sync for *const T` should read `impl<T> !Sync for *const T`
* `impl<T> !Sync for Weak<T>` should read `impl<T> !Sync for Weak<T> where T: ?Sized`
This does change a struct in librustdoc and it seems that almost everything there is marked public, so if librustdoc has stability guarantees that could be a problem. If it is, I'll find a way to rework the change to avoid modifying public structures.
Fixes#23812 by stripping the decoration when desugaring macro doc comments into #[doc] attributes, and detects whether the attribute should be inner or outer style and outputs the appropriate token tree.
