Module experiments: Add one more prelude layer for extern crate names passed with `--extern`
Implements one item from https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/the-great-module-adventure-continues/6678/183
When some name is looked up in lexical scope (`name`, i.e. not module-relative scope `some_mod::name` or `::name`), it's searched roughly in the next order:
- local variables
- items in unnamed blocks
- items in the current module
- ✨ NEW! ✨ crate names passed with `--extern` ("extern prelude")
- standard library prelude (`Vec`, `drop`)
- language prelude (built-in types like `u8`, `str`, etc)
The last two layers contain a limited set of names controlled by us and not arbitrary user-defined names like upper layers. We want to be able to add new names into these two layers without breaking user code, so "extern prelude" names have higher priority than std prelude and built-in types.
This is a one-time breaking change, that's why it would be nice to run this through crater.
Practical impact is expected to be minimal though due to stylistic reasons (there are not many `Uppercase` crates) and due to the way how primitive types are resolved (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/32131).
Make `Vec::new` a `const fn`
`RawVec::empty/_in` are a hack. They're there because `if size_of::<T> == 0 { !0 } else { 0 }` is not allowed in `const` yet. However, because `RawVec` is unstable, the `empty/empty_in` constructors can be removed when #49146 is done...
Fix ICE #48984
* ~~fbf6423 The tail type was not normalized.~~
* d0839d5680 The method had a wrong assumption that something whose parent is a trait is an associated item. Fixes#48984.
Access individual fields of tuples, closures and generators on drop.
Fixes#48623, by extending the change in #47917 to closures. Also does this for tuples and generators for consistency.
Enums are unchanged because there is now way to borrow `*enum.field` without borrowing `enum.field` at the moment, so any error would be reported when the enum goes out of scope. Unions aren't changed because unions they don't automatically drop their fields.
r? @nikomatsakis
drop elaboration should reveal all
This used to happen implicitly through the normalization function; but we now keep the param-env as is, which seems less surprising.
cc #49685
r? @eddyb
Provide better names for builtin deriving-generated attributes
First attempt at fixing #49967
Not in love with any choices here, don't be shy if you aren't happy with anything :)
I've tested that this produces nicer names in documentation, and that it no longer has issues conflicting with constants with the same name. (I guess we _could_ make a test for that... unsure if that would be valuable)
In all cases I took the names from the methods as declared in the relevant trait.
In some cases I had to prepend the names with _ otherwise there were errors about un-used variables. I'm uneasy with the inconsistency... do they all need to be like that? Is there a way to generate an alternate impl or use a different name (`_`?) in the cases where the arguments are not used?
Lastly the gensym addition to Ident I implemented largely as suggested, but I want to point out it's a little circuitous (at least, as far as I understand it). `cx.ident_of(name)` is just `Ident::from_str`, so we create an Ident then another Ident from it. `Ident::with_empty_ctxt(Symbol::gensym(string))` may or may not be equivalent, I don't know if it's important to intern it _then_ gensym it. It seems like either we could use that, or if we do want a new method to make this convenient, it could be on Ident instead (`from_str_gensymed`?)
Revert stabilization of never_type (!) et al
Fix#49691
I *think* this correctly adopts @nikomatsakis 's desired fix of:
* reverting stabilization of `!` and `TryFrom`, and
* returning to the previous fallback semantics (i.e. it is once again dependent on whether the crate has opted into `#[feature(never_type)]`,
* **without** attempting to put back in the previous future-proofing warnings regarding the change in fallback semantics.
(I'll be away from computers for a week starting now, so any updates to this PR should be either pushed into it, or someone else should adopt the task of polishing this fix and put up their own PR.)
This commit starts to lay some groundwork for the stabilization of custom
attribute invocations and general procedural macros. It applies a number of
changes discussed on [internals] as well as a [recent issue][issue], namely:
* The path used to specify a custom attribute must be of length one and cannot
be a global path. This'll help future-proof us against any ambiguities and
give us more time to settle the precise syntax. In the meantime though a bare
identifier can be used and imported to invoke a custom attribute macro. A new
feature gate, `proc_macro_path_invoc`, was added to gate multi-segment paths
and absolute paths.
* The set of items which can be annotated by a custom procedural attribute has
been restricted. Statements, expressions, and modules are disallowed behind
two new feature gates: `proc_macro_expr` and `proc_macro_mod`.
* The input to procedural macro attributes has been restricted and adjusted.
Today an invocation like `#[foo(bar)]` will receive `(bar)` as the input token
stream, but after this PR it will only receive `bar` (the delimiters were
removed). Invocations like `#[foo]` are still allowed and will be invoked in
the same way as `#[foo()]`. This is a **breaking change** for all nightly
users as the syntax coming in to procedural macros will be tweaked slightly.
* Procedural macros (`foo!()` style) can only be expanded to item-like items by
default. A separate feature gate, `proc_macro_non_items`, is required to
expand to items like expressions, statements, etc.
Closes#50038
[internals]: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/help-stabilize-a-subset-of-macros-2-0/7252
[issue]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/50038
This commit is just covering the feature gate itself and the tests
that made direct use of `!` and thus need to opt back into the
feature.
A follow on commit brings back the other change that motivates the
revert: Namely, going back to the old rules for falling back to `()`.
When compiling crates we'll be calculating and parsing `#[target_feature]` for
upstream crates. We'll also be checking the stability of listed features, but we
only want to check the listed stability during the actual crate that wrote the
relevant code. This commit updates the `target_feature` process to ignore
foreign `DefId` instances and only check the feature whitelist for local
functions.
Closes#50094
stabilize a bunch of minor api additions
besides `ptr::NonNull::cast` (which is 4 days away from end of FCP) all of these have been finished with FCP for a few weeks now with minimal issues raised
* Closes#41020
* Closes#42818
* Closes#44030
* Closes#44400
* Closes#46507
* Closes#47653
* Closes#46344
the following functions will be stabilized in 1.27:
* `[T]::rsplit`
* `[T]::rsplit_mut`
* `[T]::swap_with_slice`
* `ptr::swap_nonoverlapping`
* `NonNull::cast`
* `Duration::from_micros`
* `Duration::from_nanos`
* `Duration::subsec_millis`
* `Duration::subsec_micros`
* `HashMap::remove_entry`
prep work for using timely dataflow with NLL
Two major changes:
**Two-phase borrows are overhauled.** We no longer have two bits per borrow. Instead, we track -- for each borrow -- an (optional) "activation point". Then, for each point P where the borrow is in scope, we check where P falls relative to the activation point. If P is between the reservation point and the activation point, then this is the "reservation" phase of the borrow, else the borrow is considered active. This is simpler and means that the dataflow doesn't have to care about 2-phase at all, at last not yet.
**We no longer support using the MIR borrow checker without NLL.** It is going to be increasingly untenable to support lexical mode as we go forward, I think, and also of increasingly little value. This also exposed a few bugs in NLL mode due to increased testing.
r? @pnkfelix
cc @bobtwinkles
Update `?` repetition disambiguation.
**Do not merge** (yet)
This is a test implementation of some ideas from discussion in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48075 . This PR
- disallows `?` repetition from taking a separator, since the separator is never used.
- disallows the use of `?` as a separator. This allows patterns like `$(a)?+` to match `+` and `a+` rather than `a?a?a`. This is a _breaking change_, but maybe that's ok? Perhaps a crater run is the right approach?
cc @durka @alexreg @nikomatsakis
