Currently, `coerce_inner` discards its `ObligationCause`
when calling `try_coerce`. This interfers with other
diagnostc improvements I'm working on, since we will lose
the original span by the time the actual coercion occurs.
Additionally, we now use the span of the trailing expression
(rather than the span of the entire function) when performing
a coercion in `check_return_expr`. This currently has no visible
effect on any of the unit tests, but will unblock future
diagnostic improvements.
Rollup of 10 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #88292 (Enable --generate-link-to-definition for rustc's docs)
- #88729 (Recover from `Foo(a: 1, b: 2)`)
- #88875 (cleanup(rustc_trait_selection): remove vestigial code from rustc_on_unimplemented)
- #88892 (Move object safety suggestions to the end of the error)
- #88928 (Document the closure arguments for `reduce`.)
- #88976 (Clean up and add doc comments for CStr)
- #88983 (Allow calling `get_body_with_borrowck_facts` without `-Z polonius`)
- #88985 (Update clobber_abi list to include k[1-7] regs)
- #88986 (Update the backtrace crate)
- #89009 (Fix typo in `break` docs)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Previously "trait bounds other than `Sized` on const fn parameters are unstable"
error was used for both trait bounds (<T: Trait>) and trait objects (dyn Trait).
This was pretty confusing.
This patch adds a separeta error for trait objects: "trait objects in const fn
are unstable". The error for trait bounds is otherwise intact.
Recover from `Foo(a: 1, b: 2)`
Detect likely `struct` literal using parentheses as delimiters and emit
targeted suggestion instead of type ascription parse error.
Fix#61326.
In some cases, we emit borrowcheck diagnostics pointing
at a particular field expression in a struct expression
(e.g. `MyStruct { field: my_expr }`). However, this
behavior currently relies on us choosing the
`ConstraintCategory::Boring` with the 'correct' span.
When adding additional variants to `ConstraintCategory`,
(or changing existing usages away from `ConstraintCategory::Boring`),
the current behavior can easily get broken, since a non-boring
constraint will get chosen over a boring one.
To make the diagnostic output less fragile, this commit
adds a `ConstraintCategory::Usage` variant. We use this variant
for the temporary assignments created for each field of
an aggregate we are constructing.
Using this new variant, we can emit a message mentioning
"this usage", emphasizing the fact that the error message
is related to the specific use site (in the struct expression).
This is preparation for additional work on improving NLL error messages
(see #57374)
Disable RemoveZsts in generators to avoid query cycles
Querying layout of a generator requires its optimized MIR. Thus
computing layout during MIR optimization of a generator might create a
query cycle. Disable RemoveZsts in generators to avoid the issue
(similar approach is used in ConstProp transform already).
Fixes#88972.
When evaluating an `ExprKind::Call`, we first have to `check_expr` on it's
callee. When this one is a `ExprKind::Path`, we had to evaluate the bounds
introduced for its arguments, but by the time we evaluated them we no
longer had access to the argument spans. Now we special case this so
that we can point at the right place on unsatisfied bounds. This also
allows the E0277 deduplication to kick in correctly, so we now emit
fewer errors.
Move the information about pointing at the call argument expression in
an unmet obligation span from the `FulfillmentError` to a new
`ObligationCauseCode`.
Add non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns lint related to rfc-2008-non_exhaustive
Fixes: #84332
This PR adds `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns`, an allow by default lint that is triggered when a `non_exhaustive` type is missing explicit patterns. The warning or deny attribute can be put above the wildcard `_` pattern on enums or on the expression for enums or structs. The lint is capable of warning about multiple types within the same pattern. This lint will not be triggered for `if let ..` patterns.
```rust
// crate A
#[non_exhaustive]
pub struct Foo {
a: u8,
b: usize,
}
#[non_exhaustive]
pub enum Bar {
A(Foo),
B,
}
// crate B
#[deny(non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns)] // here
match Bar::B {
Bar::B => {}
#[deny(non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns)] // or here
_ => {}
}
#[warn(non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns)] // only here
let Foo { a, .. } = Foo::default();
#[deny(non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns)]
match Bar::B {
// triggers for Bar::B, and Foo.b
Bar::A(Foo { a, .. }) => {}
// if the attribute was here only Bar::B would cause a warning
_ => {}
}
```
When a macro is used in the trailing expression position of a block
(e.g. `fn foo() { my_macro!() }`), we currently parse it as an
expression, rather than a statement. As a result, we ended up
using the `NodeId` of the containing statement as our `lint_node_id`,
even though we don't normally do this for macro calls.
If such a macro expands to an expression with a `#[cfg]` attribute,
then the trailing statement can get removed entirely. This lead to
an ICE, since we were usng the `NodeId` of the expression to emit
a lint.
Ths commit makes us skip updating `lint_node_id` when handling
a macro in trailing expression position. This will cause us to
lint at the closest parent of the macro call.
Highlight the `const fn` if error happened because of a bound on the impl block
Currently, for the following code, the compiler produces the errors like the
following:
```rust
struct Type<T>(T);
impl<T: Clone> Type<T> {
const fn f() {}
}
```
```text
error[E0658]: trait bounds other than `Sized` on const fn parameters are unstable
--> ./test.rs:3:6
|
3 | impl<T: Clone> Type<T> {
| ^
|
= note: see issue #57563 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57563> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(const_fn_trait_bound)]` to the crate attributes to enable
```
This can be confusing (especially to newcomers) since the error mentions "const fn parameters", but highlights only the impl.
This PR adds function highlighting, changing the error to the following:
```text
error[E0658]: trait bounds other than `Sized` on const fn parameters are unstable
--> ./test.rs:3:6
|
3 | impl<T: Clone> Type<T> {
| ^
4 | pub const fn f() {}
| ---------------- function declared as const here
|
= note: see issue #57563 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57563> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(const_fn_trait_bound)]` to the crate attributes to enable
```
---
I've originally wanted to point directly to `const` token, but couldn't find a way to get it's span. It seems like this span is lost during the AST -> HIR lowering.
Also, since the errors for object casts in `const fn`s (`&T` -> `&dyn Trait`) seem to trigger the same error, this PR accidentally changes these errors too. Not sure if it's desired or how to fix this.
P.S. it's my first time contributing to diagnostics, so feedback is very appreciated!
---
r? ```@estebank```
```@rustbot``` label: +A-diagnostics
Revert anon union parsing
Revert PR #84571 and #85515, which implemented anonymous union parsing in a manner that broke the context-sensitivity for the `union` keyword and thus broke stable Rust code.
Fix#88583.
Accept `m!{ .. }.method()` and `m!{ .. }?` statements.
This PR fixes something that I keep running into when using `quote!{}.into()` in a proc macro to convert the `proc_macro2::TokenStream` to a `proc_macro::TokenStream`:
Before:
```
error: expected expression, found `.`
--> src/lib.rs:6:6
|
4 | quote! {
5 | ...
6 | }.into()
| ^ expected expression
```
After:
```
```
(No output, compiles fine.)
---
Context:
For expressions like `{ 1 }` and `if true { 1 } else { 2 }`, we accept them as full statements without a trailing `;`, which means the following is not accepted:
```rust
{ 1 } - 1 // error
```
since that is parsed as two statements: `{ 1 }` and `-1`. Syntactically correct, but the type of `{ 1 }` should be `()` as there is no `;`.
However, for specifically `.` and `?` after the `}`, we do [continue parsing it as an expression](13db8440bb/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/expr.rs (L864-L876)):
```rust
{ "abc" }.len(); // ok
```
For braced macro invocations, we do not do this:
```rust
vec![1, 2, 3].len(); // ok
vec!{1, 2, 3}.len(); // error
```
(It parses `vec!{1, 2, 3}` as a full statement, and then complains about `.len()` not being a valid expression.)
This PR changes this to also look for a `.` and `?` after a braced macro invocation. We can be sure the macro is an expression and not a full statement in those cases, since no statement can start with a `.` or `?`.
Querying layout of a generator requires its optimized MIR. Thus
computing layout during MIR optimization of a generator might create a
query cycle. Disable RemoveZsts in generators to avoid the issue
(similar approach is used in ConstProp transform already).
Const drop
The changes are pretty primitive at this point. But at least it works. ^-^
Problems with the current change that I can think of now:
- [x] `~const Drop` shouldn't change anything in the non-const world.
- [x] types that do not have drop glues shouldn't fail to satisfy `~const Drop` in const contexts. `struct S { a: u8, b: u16 }` This might not fail for `needs_non_const_drop`, but it will fail in `rustc_trait_selection`.
- [x] The current change accepts types that have `const Drop` impls but have non-const `Drop` glue.
Fixes#88424.
Significant Changes:
- `~const Drop` is no longer treated as a normal trait bound. In non-const contexts, this bound has no effect, but in const contexts, this restricts the input type and all of its transitive fields to either a) have a `const Drop` impl or b) can be trivially dropped (i.e. no drop glue)
- `T: ~const Drop` will not be linted like `T: Drop`.
- Instead of recursing and iterating through the type in `rustc_mir::transform::check_consts`, we use the trait system to special case `~const Drop`. See [`rustc_trait_selection::...::candidate_assembly#assemble_const_drop_candidates`](https://github.com/fee1-dead/rust/blob/const-drop/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/candidate_assembly.rs#L817) and others.
Changes not related to `const Drop`ping and/or changes that are insignificant:
- `Node.constness_for_typeck` no longer returns `hir::Constness::Const` for type aliases in traits. This was previously used to hack how we determine default bound constness for items. But because we now use an explicit opt-in, it is no longer needed.
- Removed `is_const_impl_raw` query. We have `impl_constness`, and the only existing use of that query uses `HirId`, which means we can just operate it with hir.
- `ty::Destructor` now has a field `constness`, which represents the constness of the destructor.
r? `@oli-obk`
Add linting on non_exhaustive structs and enum variants
Add ui tests for non_exhaustive reachable lint
Rename to non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns and avoid triggering on if let
Enum should prefer discriminant zero for niche
Given an enum with unassigned zero-discriminant, rust should prefer it for niche selection.
Zero as discriminant for `Option<Enum>` makes it possible for LLVM to optimize resulting asm.
- Eliminate branch when expected value coincides.
- Use smaller instruction `test eax, eax` instead of `cmp eax, ?`
- Possible interaction with zeroed memory?
Example:
```rust
pub enum Size {
One = 1,
Two = 2,
Three = 3,
}
pub fn handle(x: Option<Size>) -> u8 {
match x {
None => {0}
Some(size) => {size as u8}
}
}
```
In this case discriminant zero is available as a niche.
Above example on nightly:
```asm
mov eax, edi
cmp al, 4
jne .LBB0_2
xor eax, eax
.LBB0_2:
ret
```
PR:
```asm
mov eax, edi
ret
```
I created this PR because I had a performance regression when I tried to use an enum to represent legal grapheme byte-length for utf8.
Using an enum instead of `NonZeroU8` [here](d683304f5d/src/internal/decoder_incomplete.rs (L90))
resulted in a performance regression of about 5%.
I consider this to be a somewhat realistic benchmark.
Thanks to `@ogoffart` for pointing me in the right direction!
Edit: Updated description
Improve error message for missing trait in trait impl
Fixes#88818. For the following example:
```rust
struct S { }
impl for S { }
```
the current output is:
```
error: missing trait in a trait impl
--> t1.rs:2:5
|
2 | impl for S { }
| ^
```
With my changes, I get:
```
error: missing trait in a trait impl
--> t1.rs:2:5
|
2 | impl for S { }
| ^
|
help: add a trait here
|
2 | impl Trait for S { }
| +++++
help: for an inherent impl, drop this `for`
|
2 - impl for S { }
2 + impl S { }
|
```
Fix duplicate bounds for const_trait_impl
Fixes#88383.
Compare the constness of the candidates before winnowing and removing a `~const` `BoundCandidate`.
Use smaller spans for some structured suggestions
Use more accurate suggestion spans for
* argument parse error
* fully qualified path
* missing code block type
* numeric casts
Currently, for the following code, the compiler produces the errors like the
following error:
```rust
struct Type<T>
impl<T: Clone> Type<T> {
fn const f() {}
}
```
```text
error[E0658]: trait bounds other than `Sized` on const fn parameters are unstable
--> ./test.rs:3:6
|
3 | impl<T: Clone> Type<T> {
| ^
|
= note: see issue #57563 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57563> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(const_fn_trait_bound)]` to the crate attributes to enable
```
This can be confusing (especially to newcomers) since the error mentions
"const fn parameters", but highlights only the impl.
This commits adds function highlighting, changing the error to the following:
```text
error[E0658]: trait bounds other than `Sized` on const fn parameters are unstable
--> ./test.rs:3:6
|
3 | impl<T: Clone> Type<T> {
| ^
4 | pub const fn f() {}
| ---------------- function declared as const here
|
= note: see issue #57563 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/57563> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(const_fn_trait_bound)]` to the crate attributes to enable
```
This PR adds a suggestion to replace an inexisting field for an
unmentioned field. Given the following code:
```rust
enum Foo {
Bar { alpha: u8, bravo: u8, charlie: u8 },
}
fn foo(foo: Foo) {
match foo {
Foo::Bar {
alpha,
beta, // `bravo` miswritten as `beta` here.
charlie,
} => todo!(),
}
}
```
the compiler now emits the error messages below.
```text
error[E0026]: variant `Foo::Bar` does not have a field named `beta`
--> src/lib.rs:9:13
|
9 | beta, // `bravo` miswritten as `beta` here.
| ^^^^
| |
| variant `Foo::Bar` does not have this field
| help: `Foo::Bar` has a field named `bravo`: `bravo`
```
Note that this suggestion is available iff the number of inexisting
fields and unmentioned fields are both 1.
generic_const_exprs: use thir for abstract consts instead of mir
Changes `AbstractConst` building to use `thir` instead of `mir` so that there's less chance of consts unifying when they shouldn't because lowering to mir dropped information (see `abstract-consts-as-cast-5.rs` test)
r? `@lcnr`
Detect stricter constraints on gats where clauses in impls vs trait
I might try to see if I can do a bit more to improve these diagnostics, but any initial feedback is appreciated. I can also do any additional work in a followup PR.
r? `@estebank`
