Give a special message when the later use is from a call. Use the span
of the callee instead of the whole expression. For conflicting borrow
messages say that the later use is of the first borrow.
This commit special cases the move out of borrowed content error,
previously:
```
error[E0507]: cannot move out of borrowed content
--> src/main.rs:7:10
|
7 | drop(x.field);
| ^ cannot move out of borrowed content
```
to instead mention that it is a move out of a `Rc`/`Arc` which is more
helpful:
```
error[E0507]: cannot move out of an `Rc`
--> src/main.rs:7:10
|
7 | drop(x.field);
| ^ cannot move out of an `Rc`
```
Report when borrow could cause `&mut` aliasing during Drop
We were already issuing an error for the cases where this cropped up, so this is not fixing any soundness holes. The previous diagnostic just wasn't accurately describing the problem in the user's code.
Fix#52059
By introducing a new map that tracks the errors reported and the
`Place`s that spawned those errors against the move out that the error
was referring to, we are able to silence duplicate errors by emitting
only the error which corresponds to the most specific `Place` (that which
other `Place`s which reported errors are prefixes of).
This generally is an improvement, however there is a case -
`liveness-move-in-while` - where the output regresses.
It is worth pointing out that the reason that so few diagnostics are
effected is because of the filter I put in where it only goes down the
new path if the borrowed place is *not* a prefix of the dropped place.
(Without that filter, a *lot* of the tests would need this change, and
it would probably be a net loss for the UX, since you'd see it even in
cases like borrows of generic types where there is no explicit mention
of `Drop`.)
use structured suggestion for "missing mut" label
Fixes#54133 for both NLL and non-NLL.
r? @estebank
I'm not super happy with the existing wording here, since it's now a suggestion. I wonder if the message would work better as something like "help: make binding mutable: `mut foo`"?
Also, are the `HELP` and `SUGGESTION` comments necessary?
[NLL] Remove base_place
This function was supposed to make `Box` less special. But
* I think that the consensus is that MIR borrowck is going to fully special case `Box`
* It wasn't implemented correctly, it's looking at the type of the wrong `Place`, resulting in weird behaviour:
```rust
#![feature(nll)]
type A = Box<i32>; // If this is changed to another type then this will compile.
pub fn foo(x: Box<(String, A)>) {
let a = x.0; // This will compile if these lines are swapped
let b = x.1;
}
```
r? @nikomatsakis
Rollup of 17 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #53299 (Updated core/macros.rs to note it works in a no_std environment.)
- #53376 (Cross reference io::copy and fs::copy in docs.)
- #53455 (Individual docs for {from,to}_*_bytes)
- #53550 (librustc_lint: In recursion warning, change 'recurring' to 'recursing')
- #53860 (Migrate (some) of run-pass/ to ui)
- #53874 (Implement Unpin for Box, Rc, and Arc)
- #53895 (tidy: Cleanups and clippy warning fixes)
- #53946 (Clarify `ManuallyDrop` docs)
- #53948 (Minimized clippy test from when NLL disabled two-phase borrows)
- #53959 (Add .git extension to submodule paths missing it)
- #53966 (A few cleanups and minor improvements to mir/dataflow)
- #53967 (propagate build.python into cmake)
- #53979 (Remove `#[repr(transparent)]` from atomics)
- #53991 (Add unchecked_shl/shr check for intrinsics to fix miri's test suit)
- #53992 (migrate run-pass/borrowck to ui/run-pass)
- #53994 (migrate run-pass/*/ to ui/run-pass)
- #54023 (update clippy submodule)
[NLL] Returns are interesting for free regions
Based on #53088 - creating now to get feedback.
Closes#51175
* Make assigning to the return type interesting.
* Use "returning this value" instead of "return" in error messages.
* Prefer one of the explanations that we have a name for to a generic interesting cause in some cases.
* Treat causes that involve the destination of a call like assignments.
Make some ported cfail tests robust w.r.t. NLL
Updated the most glaring instances of weak tests w.r.t. NLL that came from #53196.
See also the bulletpoint list on #53351.
make more ported compile fail tests more robust w.r.t. NLL
This is similar to PR #53369, except it covers a disjoint (and much smaller) set of tests that I needed to look at more carefully before being 100% certain they were the same kind of issue.
by strengthening the tests there.
In almost all cases the strengthening amount to just encoding a use
that models the original lexical lifetime. A more invasive revision
was made in one case where it seems the actual issue is MIR-borrowck's
greater "knowledge" of unreachable code in the control flow...
optimize redundant borrows and escaping paths in NLL
This builds on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/53168 and adds a commit that addresses https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53176 -- or at least I think it does. I marked this as WIP because I want to see the test results (and measure the performance). I also want to double check we're not adding in any unsoundness here.
