Normalize function type during validation
During inlining, the callee body is normalized and has types revealed,
but some of locals corresponding to the arguments might come from the
caller body which is not. As a result the caller body does not pass
validation without additional normalization.
Closes#78442.
add error_occured field to ConstQualifs,
fix#76064
I wasn't sure what `in_return_place` actually did and not sure why it returns `ConstQualifs` while it's sibling functions return `bool`. So I tried to make as minimal changes to the structure as possible. Please point out whether I have to refactor it or not.
r? `@oli-obk`
cc `@RalfJung`
During inlining, the callee body is normalized and has types revealed,
but some of locals corresponding to the arguments might come from the
caller body which is not. As a result the caller body does not pass
validation without additional normalization.
Implement destructuring assignment for structs and slices
This is the second step towards implementing destructuring assignment (RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2909, tracking issue: #71126). This PR is the second part of #71156, which was split up to allow for easier review.
Note that the first PR (#78748) is not merged yet, so it is included as the first commit in this one. I thought this would allow the review to start earlier because I have some time this weekend to respond to reviews. If ``@petrochenkov`` prefers to wait until the first PR is merged, I totally understand, of course.
This PR implements destructuring assignment for (tuple) structs and slices. In order to do this, the following *parser change* was necessary: struct expressions are not required to have a base expression, i.e. `Struct { a: 1, .. }` becomes legal (in order to act like a struct pattern).
Unfortunately, this PR slightly regresses the diagnostics implemented in #77283. However, it is only a missing help message in `src/test/ui/issues/issue-77218.rs`. Other instances of this diagnostic are not affected. Since I don't exactly understand how this help message works and how to fix it yet, I was hoping it's OK to regress this temporarily and fix it in a follow-up PR.
Thanks to ``@varkor`` who helped with the implementation, particularly around the struct rest changes.
r? ``@petrochenkov``
Make it more clear what an about async fn's returns when referring to what it returns
see #76547
This is *likely* not the ONLY place that this happens to be unclear, but we can move this fn to rustc_middle or something like that and reuse it if need be, to apply it to more diagnostics
One outstanding question I have is, if the fn returns (), should I make the message more clear (what about `fn f()` vs `fn f() -> ()`, can you tell those apart in the hir?)
R? `@tmandry`
`@rustbot` modify labels +A-diagnostics +T-compiler
Fix#78549
Before #78430, this worked because `specialize_constructor` didn't actually care too much which constructor was passed to it unless needed. That PR however handles `&str` as a special case, and I did not anticipate patterns for the `&str` type other than string literals.
I am not very confident there are not other similar oversights left, but hopefully only `&str` was different enough to break my assumptions.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/78549
Before #78430, string literals worked because `specialize_constructor`
didn't actually care too much which constructor was passed to it unless
needed. Since then, string literals are special cased and a bit hacky. I
did not anticipate patterns for the `&str` type other than string
literals, hence this bug. This makes string literals less hacky.
Clarify main code paths in exhaustiveness checking
This PR massively clarifies the main code paths of exhaustiveness checking, by using the `Constructor` enum to a fuller extent. I've been itching to write it for more than a year, but the complexity of matching consts had prevented me. Behold a massive simplification :D.
This in particular removes a fair amount of duplication between various parts, localizes code into methods of relevant types when applicable, makes some implicit assumptions explicit, and overall improves legibility a lot (or so I hope). Additionally, after my changes undoing #76918 turned out to be a noticeable perf gain.
As usual I tried my best to make the commits self-contained and easy to follow. I've also tried to keep the code well-commented, but I tend to forget how complex this file is; I'm happy to clarify things as needed.
My measurements show good perf improvements on the two match-heavy benchmarks (-18.0% on `unicode_normalization-check`! :D); I'd like a perf run to check the overall impact.
r? `@varkor`
`@rustbot` modify labels: +A-exhaustiveness-checking
resolve: private fields in tuple struct ctor diag
Fixes#75906.
This PR improves the diagnostic emitted when a tuple struct is being constructed which has private fields so that private fields are labelled and the message is improved.
r? @estebank
Tweak invalid `fn` header and body parsing
* Rely on regular "expected"/"found" parser error for `fn`, fix#77115
* Recover empty `fn` bodies when encountering `}`
* Recover trailing `>` in return types
* Recover from non-type in array type `[<BAD TOKEN>; LEN]`
The test change is because we used to treat `&str` like other `&T`s, ie
as having a single constructor. That's not quite true though since we
consider `&str` constants as atomic instead of refs to `str` constants.
This commit improves the diagnostic emitted when a tuple struct is being
constructed which has private fields so that private fields are
labelled and the message is improved.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david@davidtw.co>
Rollup of 10 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #74477 (`#[deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]` in sys/wasm)
- #77836 (transmute_copy: explain that alignment is handled correctly)
- #78126 (Properly define va_arg and va_list for aarch64-apple-darwin)
- #78137 (Initialize tracing subscriber in compiletest tool)
- #78161 (Add issue template link to IRLO)
- #78214 (Tweak match arm semicolon removal suggestion to account for futures)
- #78247 (Fix#78192)
- #78252 (Add codegen test for #45964)
- #78268 (Do not try to report on closures to avoid ICE)
- #78295 (Add some regression tests)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
Cleanup constant matching in exhaustiveness checking
This supercedes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/77390. I made the `Opaque` constructor work.
I have opened two issues https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/78071 and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/78057 from the discussion we had on the previous PR. They are not regressions nor directly related to the current PR so I thought we'd deal with them separately.
I left a FIXME somewhere because I didn't know how to compare string constants for equality. There might even be some unicode things that need to happen there. In the meantime I preserved previous behavior.
EDIT: I accidentally fixed#78071
