When a local binding shadows a fn, point at fn def in call failure
When a local binding shadows a function that is then called, this local binding will cause an E0618 error. We now point not only at the binding definition, but also at the locally defined function of the same name.
```
error[E0618]: expected function, found `&str`
--> $DIR/issue-22468.rs:3:13
|
LL | let foo = "bar";
| --- `foo` has type `&str`
LL | let x = foo("baz");
| ^^^-------
| |
| call expression requires function
...
LL | fn foo(file: &str) -> bool {
| -------------------------- this function of the same name is available here, but it shadowed by the local binding of the same name
```
Fix#53841
Reenable effects in libcore
With #116670, #117531, and #117171, I think we would be comfortable with re-enabling the effects feature for more testing in libcore.
r? `@oli-obk`
cc `@fmease`
cc #110395
Add some additional warnings for duplicated diagnostic items
This commit adds warnings if a user supplies several diagnostic options where we can only apply one of them. We explicitly warn about ignored options here. In addition a small test for these warnings is added.
r? `@compiler-errors`
For now that's the last PR to improve the warnings generated by misused `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes. I'm not sure what needs to be done next to move this closer to stabilization.
When a local binding shadows a function that is then called, this local
binding will cause an E0618 error. We now point not only at the binding
definition, but also at the locally defined function of the same name.
```
error[E0618]: expected function, found `&str`
--> $DIR/issue-22468.rs:3:13
|
LL | let foo = "bar";
| --- `foo` has type `&str`
LL | let x = foo("baz");
| ^^^-------
| |
| call expression requires function
...
LL | fn foo(file: &str) -> bool {
| -------------------------- this function of the same name is avalable here, but it shadowed by the local binding of the same name
```
Fix#53841
When using existing fn as module, don't claim it doesn't exist
Tweak wording of module not found in resolve, when the name exists but belongs to a non-`mod` item.
Fix#81232.
Remove asmjs
Fulfills [MCP 668](https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/668).
`asmjs-unknown-emscripten` does not work as-specified, and lacks essential upstream support for generating asm.js, so it should not exist at all.
More detail when expecting expression but encountering bad macro argument
On nested macro invocations where the same macro fragment changes fragment type from one to the next, point at the chain of invocations and at the macro fragment definition place, explaining that the change has occurred.
Fix#71039.
```
error: expected expression, found pattern `1 + 1`
--> $DIR/trace_faulty_macros.rs:49:37
|
LL | (let $p:pat = $e:expr) => {test!(($p,$e))};
| ------- -- this is interpreted as expression, but it is expected to be pattern
| |
| this macro fragment matcher is expression
...
LL | (($p:pat, $e:pat)) => {let $p = $e;};
| ------ ^^ expected expression
| |
| this macro fragment matcher is pattern
...
LL | test!(let x = 1+1);
| ------------------
| | |
| | this is expected to be expression
| in this macro invocation
|
= note: when forwarding a matched fragment to another macro-by-example, matchers in the second macro will see an opaque AST of the fragment type, not the underlying tokens
= note: this error originates in the macro `test` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
```
ignore implied bounds with placeholders
given the following code:
```rust
trait Trait {
type Ty<'a> where Self: 'a;
}
impl<T> Trait for T {
type Ty<'a> = () where Self: 'a;
}
struct Foo<T: Trait>(T)
where
for<'x> T::Ty<'x>: Sized;
```
when computing the implied bounds from `Foo<X>` we incorrectly get the bound `X: !x` from the normalization of ` for<'x> <X as Trait>::Ty::<'x>: Sized`. This is a a known bug! we shouldn't use the constraints that arise from normalization as implied bounds. See #109628.
Ignore these bounds for now. This should prevent later ICEs.
Fixes#112250Fixes#107409
new solver normalization improvements
cool beans
At the core of this PR is a `try_normalize_ty` which stops for rigid aliases by using `commit_if_ok`.
Reworks alias-relate to fully normalize both the lhs and rhs and then equate the resulting rigid (or inference) types. This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/68 by avoiding the exponential blowup. Also supersedes #116369 by only defining opaque types if the hidden type is rigid.
I removed the stability check in `EvalCtxt::evaluate_goal` due to https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/75. While I personally have opinions on how to fix it, that still requires further t-types/`@nikomatsakis` buy-in, so I removed that for now. Once we've decided on our approach there, we can revert this commit.
r? `@compiler-errors`
On resolve error of `[rest..]`, suggest `[rest @ ..]`
When writing a pattern to collect multiple entries of a slice in a single binding, it is easy to misremember or typo the appropriate syntax to do so, instead writing the experimental `X..` pattern syntax. When we encounter a resolve error because `X` isn't available, we suggest `X @ ..` as an alternative.
```
error[E0425]: cannot find value `rest` in this scope
--> $DIR/range-pattern-meant-to-be-slice-rest-pattern.rs:3:13
|
LL | [1, rest..] => println!("{rest:?}"),
| ^^^^ not found in this scope
|
help: if you meant to collect the rest of the slice in `rest`, use the at operator
|
LL | [1, rest @ ..] => println!("{rest:?}"),
| +
```
Fix#88404.
document ABI compatibility
I don't think we have any central place where we document our ABI compatibility rules, so let's create one. The `fn()` pointer type seems like a good place since ABI questions can only become relevant when invoking a function through a function pointer.
This will likely need T-lang FCP.
This commit adds warnings if a user supplies several diagnostic options
where we can only apply one of them. We explicitly warn about ignored
options here. In addition a small test for these warnings is added.
When writing a pattern to collect multiple entries of a slice in a
single binding, it is easy to misremember or typo the appropriate syntax
to do so, instead writing the experimental `X..` pattern syntax. When we
encounter a resolve error because `X` isn't available, we suggest
`X @ ..` as an alternative.
```
error[E0425]: cannot find value `rest` in this scope
--> $DIR/range-pattern-meant-to-be-slice-rest-pattern.rs:3:13
|
LL | [1, rest..] => println!("{rest:?}"),
| ^^^^ not found in this scope
|
help: if you meant to collect the rest of the slice in `rest`, use the at operator
|
LL | [1, rest @ ..] => println!("{rest:?}"),
| +
```
Fix#88404.
Better handle type errors involving `Self` literals
When encountering a type error involving a `Self` literal, point at the self type of the enclosing `impl` and suggest using the actual type name instead.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/struct-path-self-type-mismatch.rs:13:9
|
LL | impl<T> Foo<T> {
| - ------ this is the type of the `Self` literal
| |
| found type parameter
LL | fn new<U>(u: U) -> Foo<U> {
| - ------ expected `Foo<U>` because of return type
| |
| expected type parameter
LL | / Self {
LL | |
LL | | inner: u
LL | |
LL | | }
| |_________^ expected `Foo<U>`, found `Foo<T>`
|
= note: expected struct `Foo<U>`
found struct `Foo<T>`
= note: a type parameter was expected, but a different one was found; you might be missing a type parameter or trait bound
= note: for more information, visit https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-02-traits.html#traits-as-parameters
help: use the type name directly
|
LL | Foo::<U> {
| ~~~~~~~~
```
Fix#76086.
When encountering a type error caused by the use of `Self`, suggest
using the actual type name instead.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/struct-path-self-type-mismatch.rs:13:9
|
LL | impl<T> Foo<T> {
| - ------ this is the type of the `Self` literal
| |
| found type parameter
LL | fn new<U>(u: U) -> Foo<U> {
| - ------ expected `Foo<U>` because of return type
| |
| expected type parameter
LL | / Self {
LL | |
LL | | inner: u
LL | |
LL | | }
| |_________^ expected `Foo<U>`, found `Foo<T>`
|
= note: expected struct `Foo<U>`
found struct `Foo<T>`
= note: a type parameter was expected, but a different one was found; you might be missing a type parameter or trait bound
= note: for more information, visit https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-02-traits.html#traits-as-parameters
help: use the type name directly
|
LL | Foo::<U> {
| ~~~~~~~~
```
Fix#76086.
Fix depth check in ProofTreeVisitor.
The hack to cutoff overflows and cycles in the new trait solver was incorrect. We want to inspect everything with depth [0..10].
This fix exposed a previously unseen bug, which caused the compiler to ICE when invoking `trait_ref` on a non-assoc type projection. I simply added the guard in the `AmbiguityCausesVisitor`, and updated the expected output for the `auto-trait-coherence` test which now includes the extra note:
```text
|
= note: upstream crates may add a new impl of trait `std::marker::Send` for type `OpaqueType` in future versions
```
r? `@lcnr`
finish `RegionKind` renaming
second step of https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/issues/95
continues the work from #117876. While working on this and I encountered a bunch of further cleanup which I'll either open a tracking issue for or will do in a separate PR:
- rewrite the `RegionKind` docs, they still talk about `ReEmpty` and are generally out of date
- rename `DescriptionCtx` to `DescriptionCtxt`
- what is `CheckRegions::Bound`?
- `collect_late_bound_regions` et al
- `erase_late_bound_regions` -> `instantiate_bound_regions_with_erased`?
- `EraseEarlyRegions` visitor should be removed, feels duplicate
r? `@BoxyUwU`
Don't expect a rcvr in `print_disambiguation_help`
We don't necessarily have a receiver when we are both accidentally using the `.` operator *AND* we have more than one ambiguous method candidate.
Fixes#117728
Build pre-coroutine-transform coroutine body on error
I was accidentally building the post-transform coroutine body, rather than the pre-transform coroutine body. There's no pinning expected here yet, and the return type isn't yet transformed into `CoroutineState`.
Fixes#117670
Custom MIR: Support cleanup blocks
Cleanup blocks are declared with `bb (cleanup) = { ... }`.
`Call` and `Drop` terminators take an additional argument describing the unwind action, which is one of the following:
* `UnwindContinue()`
* `UnwindUnreachable()`
* `UnwindTerminate(reason)`, where reason is `ReasonAbi` or `ReasonInCleanup`
* `UnwindCleanup(block)`
Also support unwind resume and unwind terminate terminators:
* `UnwindResume()`
* `UnwindTerminate(reason)`
Cleanup blocks are declared with `bb (cleanup) = { ... }`.
`Call` and `Drop` terminators take an additional argument describing the
unwind action, which is one of the following:
* `UnwindContinue()`
* `UnwindUnreachable()`
* `UnwindTerminate(reason)`, where reason is `ReasonAbi` or `ReasonInCleanup`
* `UnwindCleanup(block)`
Also support unwind resume and unwind terminate terminators:
* `UnwindResume()`
* `UnwindTerminate(reason)`
Always point at index span on index obligation failure
Use more targetted span for index obligation failures by rewriting the obligation cause span.
CC #66023
Compute layout with spans for better cycle errors in coroutines
Split out from #117703, this PR at least gives us a nicer span to point at when we hit a cycle error in coroutine layout cycles.
`ReLateBound` -> `ReBound`
first step of https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/issues/95
already fairly large xx
there's some future work here I intentionally did not contribute as part of this PR, from my notes:
- `DescriptionCtx` to `DescriptionCtxt`
- what is `CheckRegions::Bound`?
- `collect_late_bound_regions` et al
- `erase_late_bound_regions` -> `instantiate_bound_regions_with_erased`?
- `EraseEarlyRegions` should be removed, feels duplicate
r? `@BoxyUwU`
