- Change nested_visit_map so it will recusively check functions
- Add visit_stmt and visit_expr for impl Visitor for CheckAttrVisitor and check for incorrect
inline and repr attributes on staements and expressions
- Add regression test for isssue #43988
Improve lint for type alias bounds
First of all, I learned just today that I was wrong assuming that the bounds in type aliases are entirely ignored: It turns out they are used to resolve associated types in type aliases. So:
```rust
type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; // compiles
type T2<U> = U::Assoc; // fails
type T3<U> = <U as Bound>::Assoc; // "correct" way to write this, maybe?
```
I am sorry for creating this mess.
This PR changes the wording of the lint accordingly. Moreover, since just removing the bound is no longer always a possible fix, I tried to detect cases like `T1` above and show a helpful message to the user:
```
warning: bounds on generic parameters are not enforced in type aliases
--> $DIR/type-alias-bounds.rs:57:12
|
LL | type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; //~ WARN not enforced in type aliases
| ^^^^^
|
= help: the bound will not be checked when the type alias is used, and should be removed
help: use absolute paths (i.e., <T as Trait>::Assoc) to refer to associated types in type aliases
--> $DIR/type-alias-bounds.rs:57:21
|
LL | type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; //~ WARN not enforced in type aliases
| ^^^^^^^^
```
I am not sure if I got this entirely right. Ideally, we could provide a suggestion involving the correct trait and type name -- however, while I have access to the HIR in the lint, I do not know how to get access to the resolved name information, like which trait `Assoc` belongs to above. The lint does not even run if that resolution fails, so I assume that information is available *somewhere*...
This is a follow-up for (parts of) https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/48326. Also see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/21903.
This changes the name of a lint, but that lint was just merged to master yesterday and has never even been on beta.
rustc: Add a `#[wasm_custom_section]` attribute
This commit is an implementation of adding custom sections to wasm artifacts in
rustc. The intention here is to expose the ability of the wasm binary format to
contain custom sections with arbitrary user-defined data. Currently neither our
version of LLVM nor LLD supports this so the implementation is currently custom
to rustc itself.
The implementation here is to attach a `#[wasm_custom_section = "foo"]`
attribute to any `const` which has a type like `[u8; N]`. Other types of
constants aren't supported yet but may be added one day! This should hopefully
be enough to get off the ground with *some* custom section support.
The current semantics are that any constant tagged with `#[wasm_custom_section]`
section will be *appended* to the corresponding section in the final output wasm
artifact (and this affects dependencies linked in as well, not just the final
crate). This means that whatever is interpreting the contents must be able to
interpret binary-concatenated sections (or each constant needs to be in its own
custom section).
To test this change the existing `run-make` test suite was moved to a
`run-make-fulldeps` folder and a new `run-make` test suite was added which
applies to all targets by default. This test suite currently only has one test
which only runs for the wasm target (using a node.js script to use `WebAssembly`
in JS to parse the wasm output).
This commit adds a new attribute to the Rust compiler specific to the wasm
target (and no other targets). The `#[wasm_import_module]` attribute is used to
specify the module that a name is imported from, and is used like so:
#[wasm_import_module = "./foo.js"]
extern {
fn some_js_function();
}
Here the import of the symbol `some_js_function` is tagged with the `./foo.js`
module in the wasm output file. Wasm-the-format includes two fields on all
imports, a module and a field. The field is the symbol name (`some_js_function`
above) and the module has historically unconditionally been `"env"`. I'm not
sure if this `"env"` convention has asm.js or LLVM roots, but regardless we'd
like the ability to configure it!
The proposed ES module integration with wasm (aka a wasm module is "just another
ES module") requires that the import module of wasm imports is interpreted as an
ES module import, meaning that you'll need to encode paths, NPM packages, etc.
As a result, we'll need this to be something other than `"env"`!
Unfortunately neither our version of LLVM nor LLD supports custom import modules
(aka anything not `"env"`). My hope is that by the time LLVM 7 is released both
will have support, but in the meantime this commit adds some primitive
encoding/decoding of wasm files to the compiler. This way rustc postprocesses
the wasm module that LLVM emits to ensure it's got all the imports we'd like to
have in it.
Eventually I'd ideally like to unconditionally require this attribute to be
placed on all `extern { ... }` blocks. For now though it seemed prudent to add
it as an unstable attribute, so for now it's not required (as that'd force usage
of a feature gate). Hopefully it doesn't take too long to "stabilize" this!
cc rust-lang-nursery/rust-wasm#29
This commit is an implementation of adding custom sections to wasm artifacts in
rustc. The intention here is to expose the ability of the wasm binary format to
contain custom sections with arbitrary user-defined data. Currently neither our
version of LLVM nor LLD supports this so the implementation is currently custom
to rustc itself.
The implementation here is to attach a `#[wasm_custom_section = "foo"]`
attribute to any `const` which has a type like `[u8; N]`. Other types of
constants aren't supported yet but may be added one day! This should hopefully
be enough to get off the ground with *some* custom section support.
The current semantics are that any constant tagged with `#[wasm_custom_section]`
section will be *appended* to the corresponding section in the final output wasm
artifact (and this affects dependencies linked in as well, not just the final
crate). This means that whatever is interpreting the contents must be able to
interpret binary-concatenated sections (or each constant needs to be in its own
custom section).
To test this change the existing `run-make` test suite was moved to a
`run-make-fulldeps` folder and a new `run-make` test suite was added which
applies to all targets by default. This test suite currently only has one test
which only runs for the wasm target (using a node.js script to use `WebAssembly`
in JS to parse the wasm output).
Fix the conversion between bit representations and i128 representations
fixes#49181
the `Discr` type now encodes the bit representation instead of `i128` or `u128` casted to `u128`.
r? @eddyb
Convert SerializedDepGraph to be a struct-of-arrays
Fixes#47326
I did not try the "`mem::swap()` to avoid copying the arrays" idea because that would leave the DepGraph in an incorrect state and that doesn't seem like a good idea for me.
r? @michaelwoerister
Detect illegal hidden lifetimes in `impl Trait`
This branch fixes#46541 -- however, it presently doesn't build because it also *breaks* a number of existing usages of impl Trait. I'm opening it as a WIP for now, just because we want to move on impl Trait, but I'll try to fix the problem in a bit.
~~(The problem is due to the fact that we apparently infer stricter lifetimes in closures that we need to; for example, if you capture a variable of type `&'a &'b u32`, we will put *precisely* those lifetimes into the closure, even if the closure would be happy with `&'a &'a u32`. This causes the present chance to affect things that are not invariant.)~~ fixed
r? @cramertj
Suggest removing `&`s
This implements the error message discussed in #47744.
We check whether removing each `&` yields a type that satisfies the requested obligation.
Also, it was created a new `NodeId` field in `ObligationCause` in order to iterate through the `&`s. The way it's implemented now, it iterates through the obligation snippet and counts the number of `&`.
r? @estebank
Cleanup metadata and incremental cache processing of constants
fixes#49033fixes#49081
we really need tests for this. do we have any cross compilation tests? I couldn't find any
