```rust
#[plugin] #[no_link] extern crate bleh;
```
becomes a crate attribute
```rust
#![plugin(bleh)]
```
The feature gate is still required.
It's almost never correct to link a plugin into the resulting library / executable, because it will bring all of libsyntax and librustc with it. However if you really want this behavior, you can get it with a separate `extern crate` item in addition to the `plugin` attribute.
Fixes#21043.
Fixes#20769.
[breaking-change]
#[plugin] #[no_link] extern crate bleh;
becomes a crate attribute
#![plugin(bleh)]
The feature gate is still required.
It's almost never correct to link a plugin into the resulting library /
executable, because it will bring all of libsyntax and librustc with it.
However if you really want this behavior, you can get it with a separate
`extern crate` item in addition to the `plugin` attribute.
Fixes#21043.
Fixes#20769.
[breaking-change]
Makes the compilation abort when a parse error is encountered while
trying to parse an item in an included file. The previous behaviour was
to stop processing the file when a token that can't start an item was
encountered, without producing any error. Fixes#21146.
This PR moves all `compile-fail` tests that fail at the parsing stage to a `parse-fail` directory, in order to use the tests in the `parse-fail` directory to test if the new LALR parser rejects the same files as the Rust parser. I also adjusted the `testparser.py` script to handle the tests in `parse-fail` differently.
However during working on this, I discovered, that Rust's parser sometimes fails during parsing, but does not return a nonzero return code, e.g. compiling `/test/compile-fail/doc-before-semi.rs` with `-Z parse-only` prints an error message, but returns status code 0. Compiling the same file without `-Z parse-only`, the same error message is displayed, but error code 101 returned. I'll look into that over the next week.
Makes the compilation abort when a parse error is encountered while
trying to parse an item in an included file. The previous behaviour was
to stop processing the file when a token that can't start an item was
encountered, without producing any error. Fixes#21146.
Note that the change to the error message in
borrowck-use-in-index-lvalue.rs, where we report that `*w` is
uninitialized rather than `w`, was unintended fallout from the
implementation strategy used here.
The change appears harmless to me, but I welcome advice on how to
bring back the old message, which was slightly cleaner (i.e. less
unintelligible).
----
drive-by: revise compile-fail/borrowck-vec-pattern-move-tail to make
it really clear that there is a conflict that must be signaled.
(A hypothetical future version of Rust might be able to accept the
prior version of the code, since the previously updated index was not
actually aliased.)
....
The 'stable_features' lint helps people progress from unstable to
stable Rust by telling them when they no longer need a `feature`
attribute because upstream Rust has declared it stable.
This compares to the existing 'unstable_features' lint, which is used
to implement feature staging, and triggers on *any* use
of `#[feature]`.
This was particularly helpful in the time just after OIBIT's
implementation to make sure things that were supposed to be Copy
continued to be, but it's now creates a lot of noise for types that
intentionally don't want to be Copy.
r? @alexcrichton
Implement step 1 of rust-lang/rfcs#702
Allows the expression `..` (without either endpoint) in general, can be
used in slicing syntax `&expr[..]` where we previously wrote `&expr[]`.
The old syntax &expr[] is not yet removed or warned for.
The 'stable_features' lint helps people progress from unstable to
stable Rust by telling them when they no longer need a `feature`
attribute because upstream Rust has declared it stable.
This compares to the existing 'unstable_features', which is used
to implement feature staging, and triggers on *any* use
of `#[feature]`.
Allows the expression `..` (without either endpoint) in general, can be
used in slicing syntax `&expr[..]` where we previously wrote `&expr[]`.
The old syntax &expr[] is not yet removed or warned for.
This was particularly helpful in the time just after OIBIT's
implementation to make sure things that were supposed to be Copy
continued to be, but it's now creates a lot of noise for types that
intentionally don't want to be Copy.
Currently, if a `#![staged_api]` crate contains an exported item without a stability marker (or inherited stability),
the item is useless.
This change introduces a check to ensure that all exported items have a defined stability.
it also introduces the `unmarked_api` feature, which lets users import unmarked features. While this PR should in theory forbid these from existing,
in practice we can't be so sure; so this lets users bypass this check instead of having to wait for the library and/or compiler to be fixed (since otherwise this is a hard error).
r? @aturon
This *almost* completes the job for #16440. The idea is that even if we do not know whether some closure type `C` implements `Fn` or `FnMut` (etc), we still know its argument and return types. So if we see an obligation `C : Fn(_0)`, we can unify `_0` with those argument types while still considering the obligation ambiguous and unsatisfied. This helps to make a lot of progress with type inference even before closure kind inference is done.
As part of this PR, the explicit `:` syntax is removed from the AST and completely ignored. We still infer the closure kind based on the expected type if that is available. There are several reasons for this. First, deciding the closure kind earlier is always better, as it allows us to make more progress. Second, this retains a (admittedly obscure) way for users to manually specify the closure kind, which is useful for writing tests if nothing else. Finally, there are still some cases where inference can fail, so it may be useful to have this manual override. (The expectation is that we will eventually revisit an explicit syntax for specifying the closure kind, but it will not be `:` and may be some sort of generalization of the `||` syntax to handle other traits as well.)
This commit does not *quite* fix#16640 because a snapshot is still needed to enable the obsolete syntax errors for explicit `&mut:` and friends.
r? @eddyb as he reviewed the prior patch in this direction
Use the crates.io crate `rand` (version 0.1 should be a drop in
replacement for `std::rand`) and `rand_macros` (`#[derive_Rand]` should
be a drop-in replacement).
[breaking-change]
As part of [RFC 474](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/474), this
commit renames `std::path` to `std::old_path`, leaving the existing path
API in place to ease migration to the new one. Updating should be as
simple as adjusting imports, and the prelude still maps to the old path
APIs for now.
[breaking-change]
closure kind, thereby detecting what happens if there are
mismatches. Simply removing the `:` annotations caused most of these
tests to pass or produce other errors, because the inference would
convert the closure into a more appropriate kind. (The ability to
override the inference by using the expected type is an important
backdoor partly for this reason.)
That is, when offering suggestions for unresolved method calls, avoid
suggesting traits for which implementing the trait for the receiver type
either makes little sense (e.g. type errors, or sugared unboxed
closures), or violates coherence.
The latter is approximated by ensuring that at least one of `{receiver
type, trait}` is local. This isn't precisely correct due to
multidispatch, but the error messages one encounters in such situation
are useless more often than not; it is better to be conservative and
miss some cases, than have overly many false positives (e.g. writing
`some_slice.map(|x| ...)` uselessly suggested that one should implement
`IteratorExt` for `&[T]`, while the correct fix is to call `.iter()`).
Closes#21420.
That is, when offering suggestions for unresolved method calls, avoid
suggesting traits for which implementing the trait for the receiver type
either makes little sense (e.g. type errors, or sugared unboxed
closures), or violates coherence.
The latter is approximated by ensuring that at least one of `{receiver
type, trait}` is local. This isn't precisely correct due to
multidispatch, but the error messages one encounters in such situation
are useless more often than not; it is better to be conservative and
miss some cases, than have overly many false positives (e.g. writing
`some_slice.map(|x| ...)` uselessly suggested that one should implement
`IteratorExt` for `&[T]`, while the correct fix is to call `.iter()`).
Closes#21420.
