Add a stack-`pin!`-ning macro to `core::pin`.
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93178
`pin!` allows pinning a value to the stack. Thanks to being implemented in the stdlib, which gives access to `macro` macros, and to the private `.pointer` field of the `Pin` wrapper, [it was recently discovered](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/187312-wg-async-foundations/topic/pin!.20.E2.80.94.20the.20.22definitive.22.20edition.20.28a.20rhs-compatible.20pin-nin.2E.2E.2E/near/268731241) ([archive link](https://zulip-archive.rust-lang.org/stream/187312-wg-async-foundations/topic/A.20rhs-compatible.20pin-ning.20macro.html#268731241)), contrary to popular belief, that it is actually possible to implement and feature such a macro:
```rust
let foo: Pin<&mut PhantomPinned> = pin!(PhantomPinned);
stuff(foo);
```
or, directly:
```rust
stuff(pin!(PhantomPinned));
```
- For context, historically, this used to require one of the two following syntaxes:
- ```rust
let foo = PhantomPinned;
pin!(foo);
stuff(foo);
```
- ```rust
pin! {
let foo = PhantomPinned;
}
stuff(foo);
```
This macro thus allows, for instance, doing things like:
```diff
fn block_on<T>(fut: impl Future<Output = T>) -> T {
// Pin the future so it can be polled.
- let mut fut = Box::pin(fut);
+ let mut fut = pin!(fut);
// Create a new context to be passed to the future.
let t = thread::current();
let waker = Arc::new(ThreadWaker(t)).into();
let mut cx = Context::from_waker(&waker);
// Run the future to completion.
loop {
match fut.as_mut().poll(&mut cx) {
Poll::Ready(res) => return res,
Poll::Pending => thread::park(),
}
}
}
```
- _c.f._, https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.58.1/alloc/task/trait.Wake.html
And so on, and so forth.
I don't think such an API can get better than that, barring full featured language support (`&pin` references or something), so I see no reason not to start experimenting with featuring this in the stdlib already 🙂
- cc `@rust-lang/wg-async-foundations` \[EDIT: this doesn't seem to have pinged anybody 😩, thanks `@yoshuawuyts` for the real ping\]
r? `@joshtriplett`
___
# Docs preview
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9920355/150605731-1f45c2eb-c9b0-4ce3-b17f-2784fb75786e.mp4
___
# Implementation
The implementation ends up being dead simple (so much it's embarrassing):
```rust
pub macro pin($value:expr $(,)?) {
Pin { pointer: &mut { $value } }
}
```
_and voilà_!
- The key for it working lies in [the rules governing the scope of anonymous temporaries](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.58.1/reference/destructors.html#temporary-lifetime-extension).
<details><summary>Comments and context</summary>
This is `Pin::new_unchecked(&mut { $value })`, so, for starters, let's
review such a hypothetical macro (that any user-code could define):
```rust
macro_rules! pin {( $value:expr ) => (
match &mut { $value } { at_value => unsafe { // Do not wrap `$value` in an `unsafe` block.
$crate::pin::Pin::<&mut _>::new_unchecked(at_value)
}}
)}
```
Safety:
- `type P = &mut _`. There are thus no pathological `Deref{,Mut}` impls that would break `Pin`'s invariants.
- `{ $value }` is braced, making it a _block expression_, thus **moving** the given `$value`, and making it _become an **anonymous** temporary_.
By virtue of being anonynomous, it can no longer be accessed, thus preventing any attemps to `mem::replace` it or `mem::forget` it, _etc._
This gives us a `pin!` definition that is sound, and which works, but only in certain scenarios:
- If the `pin!(value)` expression is _directly_ fed to a function call:
`let poll = pin!(fut).poll(cx);`
- If the `pin!(value)` expression is part of a scrutinee:
```rust
match pin!(fut) { pinned_fut => {
pinned_fut.as_mut().poll(...);
pinned_fut.as_mut().poll(...);
}} // <- `fut` is dropped here.
```
Alas, it doesn't work for the more straight-forward use-case: `let` bindings.
```rust
let pinned_fut = pin!(fut); // <- temporary value is freed at the end of this statement
pinned_fut.poll(...) // error[E0716]: temporary value dropped while borrowed
// note: consider using a `let` binding to create a longer lived value
```
- Issues such as this one are the ones motivating https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/66
This makes such a macro incredibly unergonomic in practice, and the reason most macros out there had to take the path of being a statement/binding macro (_e.g._, `pin!(future);`) instead of featuring the more intuitive ergonomics of an expression macro.
Luckily, there is a way to avoid the problem. Indeed, the problem stems from the fact that a temporary is dropped at the end of its enclosing statement when it is part of the parameters given to function call, which has precisely been the case with our `Pin::new_unchecked()`!
For instance,
```rust
let p = Pin::new_unchecked(&mut <temporary>);
```
becomes:
```rust
let p = { let mut anon = <temporary>; &mut anon };
```
However, when using a literal braced struct to construct the value, references to temporaries can then be taken. This makes Rust change the lifespan of such temporaries so that they are, instead, dropped _at the end of the enscoping block_.
For instance,
```rust
let p = Pin { pointer: &mut <temporary> };
```
becomes:
```rust
let mut anon = <temporary>;
let p = Pin { pointer: &mut anon };
```
which is *exactly* what we want.
Finally, we don't hit problems _w.r.t._ the privacy of the `pointer` field, or the unqualified `Pin` name, thanks to `decl_macro`s being _fully_ hygienic (`def_site` hygiene).
</details>
___
# TODO
- [x] Add compile-fail tests with attempts to break the `Pin` invariants thanks to the macro (_e.g._, try to access the private `.pointer` field, or see what happens if such a pin is used outside its enscoping scope (borrow error));
- [ ] Follow-up stuff:
- [ ] Try to experiment with adding `pin!` to the prelude: this may require to be handled with some extra care, as it may lead to issues reminiscent of those of `assert_matches!`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82913
- [x] Create the tracking issue.
Generator drop tracking: improve break and continue handling
This PR fixes two related issues.
One, sometimes break or continue have a block target instead of an expression target. This seems to mainly happen with try blocks. Since the drop tracking analysis only works on expressions, if we see a block target for break or continue, we substitute the last expression of the block as the target instead.
Two, break and continue were incorrectly being treated as the same, so continue would also show up as an exit from the loop or block. This patch corrects the way continue is handled by keeping a stack of loop entry points and uses those to find the target of the continue.
Fixes#93197
r? `@nikomatsakis`
This thus still makes it technically possible to enable the feature, and thus
to trigger UB without `unsafe`, but this is fine since incomplete features are
known to be potentially unsound (labelled "may not be safe").
This follows from the discussion at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93176#discussion_r799413561
make `find_similar_impl_candidates` even fuzzier
continues the good work of `@BGR360` in #92223. I might have overshot a bit and we're now slightly too fuzzy 😅
with this we can now also simplify `simplify_type`, which is nice :3
Make `Res::SelfTy` a struct variant and update docs
I found pattern matching on a `(Option<DefId>, Option<(DefId, bool)>)` to not be super readable, additionally the doc comments on the types in a tuple variant aren't visible anywhere at use sites as far as I can tell (using rust analyzer + vscode)
The docs incorrectly assumed that the `DefId` in `Option<(DefId, bool)>` would only ever be for an impl item and I also found the code examples to be somewhat unclear about which `DefId` was being talked about.
r? `@lcnr` since you reviewed the last PR changing these docs
Remove Config::stderr
1. It captured stdout and not stderr
2. It isn't used anywhere
3. All error messages should go to the DiagnosticOutput instead
4. It modifies thread local state
Marking as blocked as it will conflict a bit with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93936.
1. It captured stdout and not stderr
2. It isn't used anywhere
3. All error messages should go to the DiagnosticOutput instead
4. It modifies thread local state
Couple of driver cleanups
* Remove the `RustcDefaultCalls` struct, which hasn't been necessary since the introduction of `rustc_interface`.
* Move the `setup_callbacks` call around for a tiny code deduplication.
* Remove the `SPAN_DEBUG` global as it isn't actually necessary.
Improve chalk integration
- Support subtype bounds in chalk lowering
- Handle universes in canonicalization
- Handle type parameters in chalk responses
- Use `chalk_ir::LifetimeData::Empty` for `ty::ReEmpty`
- Remove `ignore-compare-mode-chalk` for tests that no longer hang (they may still fail or ICE)
This is enough to get a hello world program to compile with `-Zchalk` now. Some of the remaining issues that are needed to get Chalk integration working on larger programs are:
- rust-lang/chalk#234
- rust-lang/chalk#548
- rust-lang/chalk#734
- Generators are handled differently in chalk and rustc
r? `@jackh726`
Apply noundef attribute to &T, &mut T, Box<T>, bool
This doesn't handle `char` because it's a bit awkward to distinguish it from `u32` at this point in codegen.
Note that this _does not_ change whether or not it is UB for `&`, `&mut`, or `Box` to point to undef. It only applies to the pointer itself, not the pointed-to memory.
Fixes (partially) #74378.
r? `@nikic` cc `@RalfJung`
Inherit lifetimes for async fn instead of duplicating them.
The current desugaring of `async fn foo<'a>(&usize) -> &u8` is equivalent to
```rust
fn foo<'a, '0>(&'0 usize) -> foo<'static, 'static>::Opaque<'a, '0, '_>;
type foo<'_a, '_0>::Opaque<'a, '0, '1> = impl Future<Output = &'1 u8>;
```
following the RPIT model.
Duplicating all the inherited lifetime parameters and setting the inherited version to `'static` makes lowering more complex and causes issues like #61949. This PR removes the duplication of inherited lifetimes to directly use
```rust
fn foo<'a, '0>(&'0 usize) -> foo<'a, '0>::Opaque<'_>;
type foo<'a, '0>::Opaque<'1> = impl Future<Output = &'1 u8>;
```
following the TAIT model.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61949
The only difference between the default and rustc_interface set version
is that the default accesses the source map from SESSION_GLOBALS while
the rustc_interface version accesses the source map from the global
TyCtxt. SESSION_GLOBALS is always set while running the compiler while
the global TyCtxt is not always set. If the global TyCtxt is set, it's
source map is identical to the one in SESSION_GLOBALS
This ensures that it is called even when run_in_thread_pool_with_globals
is avoided and reduces code duplication between the parallel and
non-parallel version of run_in_thread_pool_with_globals
tidy: Extend error code check
We discovered in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93845 that the error code tidy check didn't check everything: if you remove an error code from the listing even if it has an explanation, then it should error.
It also allowed me to put back `E0192` in that listing as well.
r? ```@Mark-Simulacrum```
fix ICE when parsing lifetime as function argument
I don't really like this, but we basically need to emit an error instead of just delaying an bug, because there are too many places in the AST that aren't covered by my previous PRs...
cc: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93282#issuecomment-1028052945
Implement `tainted_by_errors` in MIR borrowck, use it to skip CTFE
Putting this up for initial review. The issue that I found is when we're evaluating a const, we're doing borrowck, but doing nothing with the fact that borrowck fails.
This implements a `tainted_by_errors` field for MIR borrowck like we have in infcx, so we can use that information to return an `Err` during const eval if our const fails to borrowck.
This PR needs some cleaning up. I should probably just use `Result` in more places, instead of `.expect`ing in the places I am, but I just wanted it to compile so I could see if it worked!
Fixes#93646
r? `@oli-obk`
feel free to reassign
Use const generics in SipHasher128's short_write
This was proposed by `@michaelwoerister` [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93615#discussion_r799485554).
A few comments:
1) I tried to pass `&[u8; LEN]` instead of `[u8; LEN]`. Locally, it resulted in small icount regressions (about 0.5 %). When passing by value, there were no regressions (and no improvements).
2) I wonder if we should use `to_ne_bytes()` in `SipHasher128` to keep it generic and only use `to_le_bytes()` in `StableHasher`. However, currently `SipHasher128` is only used in `StableHasher` and the `short_write` method was private, so I couldn't use it directly from `StableHasher`. Using `to_le()` in the `StableHasher` was breaking this abstraction boundary before slightly.
```rust
debug_assert!(LEN <= 8);
```
This could be done at compile time, but actually I think that now we can remove this assert altogether.
r? `@the8472`
