Properly re-use def path hash in incremental mode
Fixes#79661
In incremental compilation mode, we update a `DefPathHash -> DefId`
mapping every time we create a `DepNode` for a foreign `DefId`.
This mapping is written out to the on-disk incremental cache, and is
read by the next compilation session to allow us to lazily decode
`DefId`s.
When we decode a `DepNode` from the current incremental cache, we need
to ensure that any previously-recorded `DefPathHash -> DefId` mapping
gets recorded in the new mapping that we write out. However, PR #74967
didn't do this in all cases, leading to us being unable to decode a
`DefPathHash` in certain circumstances.
This PR refactors some of the code around `DepNode` deserialization to
prevent this kind of mistake from happening again.
On the nopt builders, we disable optimization by default for all tests
which causes the new behavior to take effect and causes the tests to
fail when they should not. By passing the `-O` flag explicitly, we will
always run these tests with optimizations enabled.
Also generate `StorageDead` in constants
r? `@eddyb`
None of this special casing is actually necessary since we started promoting within constants and statics.
We may want to keep some of it around out of perf reasons, but it's not required for user visible behaviour
somewhat related: #68622
remove this weird special case from promotion
Promotion has a special case to ignore interior mutability under some specific circumstances. The purpose of this PR is to figure out what changes if we remove that. Since `Cell::new` and friends only get promoted inside `const`/`static` initializers these days, it actually is not easy to exploit this case: you need something like
```rust
const TEST_INTERIOR_MUT: () = {
// The "0." case is already ruled out by not permitting any interior mutability in `const`.
let _val: &'static _ = &(Cell::new(1), 2).1;
};
```
I assume something like `&Some(&(Cell::new(1), 2).1)` would hit the nested case inside `validate_rvalue`... though I am not sure why that would not just trigger nested promotion, first promoting the inner reference and then the outer one?
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/67534 (by simply rejecting that code^^)
r? `@oli-obk` (but for now this is not meant to be merged!)
Cc `@rust-lang/wg-const-eval`
Code like
impl Foo {
default fn foo() {}
}
will trigger the error
error: `default` is only allowed on items in `impl` definitions
--> src/lib.rs:5:5
|
5 | default fn foo() {}
| -------^^^^^^^^^
| |
| `default` because of this
but that's very confusing! I *did* put it on an item in an impl!
So this commit changes the message to
error: `default` is only allowed on items in trait impls
--> src/lib.rs:5:5
|
5 | default fn foo() {}
| -------^^^^^^^^^
| |
| `default` because of this
Fixes: #79725
Some macros can create a situation where `fn_sig_span` and `body_span`
map to different files.
New documentation on coverage tests incorrectly assumed multiple test
binaries could just be listed at the end of the `llvm-cov` command,
but it turns out each binary needs a `--object` prefix.
This PR fixes the bug and updates the documentation to correct that
issue. It also fixes a few other minor issues in internal implementation
comments, and adds documentation on getting coverage results for doc
tests.
Validate naked functions definitions
Validate that naked functions are defined in terms of a single inline assembly
block that uses only `const` and `sym` operands and has `noreturn` option.
Implemented as future incompatibility lint with intention to migrate it into
hard error. When it becomes a hard error it will ensure that naked functions are
either unsafe or contain an unsafe block around the inline assembly. It will
guarantee that naked functions do not reference functions parameters (obsoleting
part of existing checks from #79411). It will limit the definitions of naked
functions to what can be reliably supported. It will also reject naked functions
implemented using legacy LLVM style assembly since it cannot satisfy those
conditions.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2774https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2972
Prior to this commit, debuginfo was always generated by mapping a name
to a Place. This has the side-effect that `SimplifyLocals` cannot remove
locals that are only used for debuginfo because their other uses have
been const-propagated.
To allow these locals to be removed, we now allow debuginfo to point to
a constant value. The `ConstProp` pass detects when debuginfo points to
a local with a known constant value and replaces it with the value. This
allows the later `SimplifyLocals` pass to remove the local.
extend `WithOptConstParam` docs, move rustdoc test
This should hopefully make things a bit clearer, feel free to comment on anything which can still be improved.
cc `@ecstatic-morse` `@nikomatsakis` `@RalfJung`
Const parameters can not be inferred with `_` help note
This should close: #79557
# Example output
```
error[E0747]: type provided when a constant was expected
--> inferred_const_note.rs:6:19
|
6 | let a = foo::<_, 2>([0, 1, 2]);
| ^
|
= help: Const parameters can not be inferred with `_`
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0747`.
```
r? `@lcnr`
A slightly clearer diagnostic when misusing const
Fixes#79598
This produces the following diagnostic:
"expected one of `>`, a const expression, lifetime, or type, found keyword `const`"
Instead of the previous, more confusing:
"expected one of `>`, const, lifetime, or type, found keyword `const`"
This might not be completely clear as some users might not understand what a const expression is, but I do believe this is an improvement.
Fix src/test/ui/env-vars.rs on 128-core machines on Windows
On Windows, the environment variable NUMBER_OF_PROCESSORS has special
meaning. Unfortunately, you can get different answers, depending on
whether you are enumerating all environment variables or querying a
specific variable. This was causing the src/test/ui/env-vars.rs test
to fail on machines with more than 64 processors when run on Windows.
check the recursion limit when finding a struct's tail
fixes#79437
This does a `delay_span_bug` (via `ty_error_with_message`) rather than emit a new error message, under the assumption that there will be an error elsewhere (even if the type isn't infinitely recursive, just deeper than the recursion limit, this appears to be the case).
Fixes#79661
In incremental compilation mode, we update a `DefPathHash -> DefId`
mapping every time we create a `DepNode` for a foreign `DefId`.
This mapping is written out to the on-disk incremental cache, and is
read by the next compilation session to allow us to lazily decode
`DefId`s.
When we decode a `DepNode` from the current incremental cache, we need
to ensure that any previously-recorded `DefPathHash -> DefId` mapping
gets recorded in the new mapping that we write out. However, PR #74967
didn't do this in all cases, leading to us being unable to decode a
`DefPathHash` in certain circumstances.
This PR refactors some of the code around `DepNode` deserialization to
prevent this kind of mistake from happening again.
