mention lint group in default level lint note
### Summary
This PR updates lint diagnostics so that default-level notes now mention the lint group they belong to, if any.
Fixes: rust-lang/rust#65464.
### Example
```rust
fn main() {
let x = 5;
}
```
Before:
```
= note: `#[warn(unused_variables)]` on by default
```
After:
```
= note: `#[warn(unused_variables)]` (part of `#[warn(unused)]`) on by default
```
### Unchanged Cases
Messages remain the same when the lint level is explicitly set, e.g.:
* Attribute on the lint `#[warn(unused_variables)]`:
```
note: the lint level is defined here
LL | #[warn(unused_variables)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
* Attribute on the group `#[warn(unused)]:`:
```
= note: `#[warn(unused_variables)]` implied by `#[warn(unused)]`
```
* CLI option `-W unused`:
```
= note: `-W unused-variables` implied by `-W unused`
= help: to override `-W unused` add `#[allow(unused_variables)]`
```
* CLI option `-W unused-variables`:
```
= note: requested on the command line with `-W unused-variables`
```
Port must_use to the new target checking
This PR ports `must_use` to the new target checking logic
This also adds a tool-only suggestion to remove attributes on invalid targets, as to not immediately undo the work of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/145274
r? `@jdonszelmann`
Remove the `From` derive macro from prelude
The new `#[derive(From)]` functionality (implemented in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/144922) caused name resolution ambiguity issues (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/145524). The reproducer looks e.g. like this:
```rust
mod foo {
pub use derive_more::From;
}
use foo::*;
#[derive(From)] // ERROR: `From` is ambiguous
struct S(u32);
```
It's pretty unfortunate that it works like this, but I guess that there's not much to be done here, and we'll have to wait for the next edition to put the `From` macro into the prelude. That will probably require https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139493 to land.
I created a new module in core (and re-exported it in std) called `from`, where I re-exported the `From` macro. I *think* that since this is a new module, it should not have the same backwards incompatibility issue.
Happy to hear suggestions about the naming - maybe it would make sense as `core::macros::from::From`? But we already had a precedent in the `core::assert_matches` module, so I just followed suit.
Fixes: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/145524
r? ``@petrochenkov``
Remove the `#[no_sanitize]` attribute in favor of `#[sanitize(xyz = "on|off")]`
This came up during the sanitizer stabilization (rust-lang/rust#123617). Instead of a `#[no_sanitize(xyz)]` attribute, we would like to have a `#[sanitize(xyz = "on|off")]` attribute, which is more powerful and allows to be extended in the future (instead
of just focusing on turning sanitizers off). The implementation is done according to what was [discussed on Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/343119-project-exploit-mitigations/topic/Stabilize.20the.20.60no_sanitize.60.20attribute/with/495377292)).
The new attribute also works on modules, traits and impl items and thus enables usage as the following:
```rust
#[sanitize(address = "off")]
mod foo {
fn unsanitized(..) {}
#[sanitize(address = "on")]
fn sanitized(..) {}
}
trait MyTrait {
#[sanitize(address = "off")]
fn unsanitized_default(..) {}
}
#[sanitize(thread = "off")]
impl MyTrait for () {
...
}
```
r? ```@rcvalle```
This removes the #[no_sanitize] attribute, which was behind an unstable
feature named no_sanitize. Instead, we introduce the sanitize attribute
which is more powerful and allows to be extended in the future (instead
of just focusing on turning sanitizers off).
This also makes sanitize(kernel_address = ..) attribute work with
-Zsanitize=address
To do it the same as how clang disables address sanitizer, we now
disable ASAN on sanitize(kernel_address = "off") and KASAN on
sanitize(address = "off").
The same was added to clang in https://reviews.llvm.org/D44981.
This change implements the #[sanitize(..)] attribute, which opts to
replace the currently unstable #[no_sanitize]. Essentially the new
attribute works similar as #[no_sanitize], just with more flexible
options regarding where it is applied. E.g. it is possible to turn
a certain sanitizer either on or off:
`#[sanitize(address = "on|off")]`
This attribute now also applies to more places, e.g. it is possible
to turn off a sanitizer for an entire module or impl block:
```rust
\#[sanitize(address = "off")]
mod foo {
fn unsanitized(..) {}
#[sanitize(address = "on")]
fn sanitized(..) {}
}
\#[sanitize(thread = "off")]
impl MyTrait for () {
...
}
```
This attribute is enabled behind the unstable `sanitize` feature.
Implement declarative (`macro_rules!`) derive macros (RFC 3698)
This is a draft for review, and should not be merged yet.
This is layered atop https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/145153 , and has
only two additional commits atop that. The first handles parsing and provides a
test for various parse errors. The second implements expansion and handles
application.
This implements RFC 3698, "Declarative (`macro_rules!`) derive macros".
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/143549
This has one remaining issue, which I could use some help debugging: in
`tests/ui/macros/macro-rules-derive-error.rs`, the diagnostics for
`derive(fn_only)` (for a `fn_only` with no `derive` rules) and
`derive(ForwardReferencedDerive)` both get emitted twice, as a duplicate
diagnostic.
From what I can tell via adding some debugging code,
`unresolved_macro_suggestions` is getting called twice from
`finalize_macro_resolutions` for each of them, because
`self.single_segment_macro_resolutions` has two entries for the macro, with two
different `parent_scope` values. I'm not clear on why that happened; it doesn't
happen with the equivalent code using attrs.
I'd welcome any suggestions for fixing this.
Modify `AttributeTemplate` to support list of alternatives for list and name value attribute styles.
Suggestions now provide more correct suggested code:
```
error[E0805]: malformed `used` attribute input
--> $DIR/used_with_multi_args.rs:3:1
|
LL | #[used(compiler, linker)]
| ^^^^^^------------------^
| |
| expected a single argument here
|
help: try changing it to one of the following valid forms of the attribute
|
LL - #[used(compiler, linker)]
LL + #[used(compiler)]
|
LL - #[used(compiler, linker)]
LL + #[used(linker)]
|
LL - #[used(compiler, linker)]
LL + #[used]
|
```
instead of the prior "masking" of the lack of this feature by suggesting pipe-separated lists:
```
error[E0805]: malformed `used` attribute input
--> $DIR/used_with_multi_args.rs:3:1
|
LL | #[used(compiler, linker)]
| ^^^^^^------------------^
| |
| expected a single argument here
|
help: try changing it to one of the following valid forms of the attribute
|
LL - #[used(compiler, linker)]
LL + #[used(compiler|linker)]
|
LL - #[used(compiler, linker)]
LL + #[used]
|
```
Disabling loading of pretty printers in the debugger itself is more
reliable. Before this commit the .gdb_debug_scripts section couldn't be
included in dylibs or rlibs as otherwise there is no way to disable the
section anymore without recompiling the entire standard library.
Mitigate `#[align]` name resolution ambiguity regression with a rename
Mitigates beta regression rust-lang/rust#143834 after a beta backport.
### Background on the beta regression
The name resolution regression arises due to rust-lang/rust#142507 adding a new feature-gated built-in attribute named `#[align]`. However, unfortunately even [introducing new feature-gated unstable built-in attributes can break user code](https://www.github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134963) such as
```rs
macro_rules! align {
() => {
/* .. */
};
}
pub(crate) use align; // `use` here becomes ambiguous
```
### Mitigation approach
This PR renames `#[align]` to `#[rustc_align]` to mitigate the beta regression by:
1. Undoing the introduction of a new built-in attribute with a common name, i.e. `#[align]`.
2. Renaming `#[align]` to `#[rustc_align]`. The renamed attribute being `rustc_align` will not introduce new stable breakages, as attributes beginning with `rustc` are reserved and perma-unstable. This does mean existing nightly code using `fn_align` feature will additionally need to specify `#![feature(rustc_attrs)]`.
This PR is very much a short-term mitigation to alleviate time pressure from having to fully fix the current limitation of inevitable name resolution regressions that would arise from adding any built-in attributes. Long-term solutions are discussed in [#t-lang > namespacing macro attrs to reduce conflicts with new adds](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/213817-t-lang/topic/namespacing.20macro.20attrs.20to.20reduce.20conflicts.20with.20new.20adds/with/529249622).
### Alternative mitigation options
[Various mitigation options were considered during the compiler triage meeting](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/143834#issuecomment-3084415277), and those consideration are partly reproduced here:
- Reverting the PR doesn't seem very minimal/trivial, and carries risks of its own.
- Rename to a less-common but aim-to-stabilization name is itself not safe nor convenient, because (1) that risks introducing new regressions (i.e. ambiguity against the new name), and (2) lang would have to FCP the new name hastily for the mitigation to land timely and have a chance to be backported. This also makes the path towards stabilization annoying.
- Rename the attribute to a rustc attribute, which will be perma-unstable and does not cause new ambiguities in stable code.
- This alleviates the time pressure to address *this* regression, or for lang to have to rush an FCP for some new name that can still break user code.
- This avoids backing out a whole implementation.
### Review advice
This PR is best reviewed commit-by-commit.
- Commit 1 adds a test `tests/ui/attributes/fn-align-nameres-ambiguity-143834.rs` which demonstrates the current name resolution regression re. `align`. This test fails against current master.
- Commit 2 carries out the renames and test reblesses. Notably, commit 2 will cause `tests/ui/attributes/fn-align-nameres-ambiguity-143834.rs` to change from fail (nameres regression) to pass.
This PR, if the approach still seems acceptable, will need a beta-backport to address the beta regression.
From `#[align]` -> `#[rustc_align]`. Attributes starting with `rustc`
are always perma-unstable and feature-gated by `feature(rustc_attrs)`.
See regression RUST-143834.
For the underlying problem where even introducing new feature-gated
unstable built-in attributes can break user code such as
```rs
macro_rules! align {
() => {
/* .. */
};
}
pub(crate) use align; // `use` here becomes ambiguous
```
refer to RUST-134963.
Since the `#[align]` attribute is still feature-gated by
`feature(fn_align)`, we can rename it as a mitigation. Note that
`#[rustc_align]` will obviously mean that current unstable user code
using `feature(fn_aling)` will need additionally `feature(rustc_attrs)`,
but this is a short-term mitigation to buy time, and is expected to be
changed to a better name with less collision potential.
See
<https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/238009-t-compiler.2Fmeetings/topic/.5Bweekly.5D.202025-07-17/near/529290371>
where mitigation options were considered.
Having multiple relaxed bounds like `?Sized + ?Iterator` is actually *fine*.
We actually want to reject *duplicate* relaxed bounds like `?Sized + ?Sized`
because these most certainly represent a user error.
Note that this doesn't mean that we accept more code because a bound like
`?Iterator` is still invalid as it's not relaxing a *default* trait and
the only way to define / use more default bounds is under the experimental
and internal feature `more_maybe_bounds` plus `lang_items` plus unstable
flag `-Zexperimental-default-bounds` (historical context: for the longest
time, bounds like `?Iterator` were actually allowed and lead to a hard
warning).
Ultimately, this simply *reframes* the diagnostic. The scope of
`more_maybe_bounds` / `-Zexperimental-default-bounds` remains unchanged
as well.
* The phrasing "only does something for" made sense back when this
diagnostic was a (hard) warning. Now however, it's simply a hard
error and thus completely rules out "doing something".
* The primary message was way too long
* The new wording more closely mirrors the wording we use for applying
other bound modifiers (like `const` and `async`) to incompatible
traits.
* "all other traits are not bound by default" is no longer accurate
under Sized Hierarchy. E.g., traits and assoc tys are (currently)
bounded by `MetaSized` by default but can't be relaxed using
`?MetaSized` (instead, you relax it by adding `PointeeSized`).
* I've decided against adding any diagnositic notes or suggestions
for now like "trait `Trait` can't be relaxed as it's not bound by
default" which would be incorrect for `MetaSized` and assoc tys
as mentioned above) or "consider changing `?MetaSized` to
`PointeeSized`" as the Sized Hierarchy impl is still WIP)
Attribute rework: a parser for single attributes without arguments
Part of rust-lang/rust#131229
r? `@jdonszelmann`
I think code (with comments) speaks for itself.
The only subtlety: now `#[cold]`, `#[no_mangle]`, & `#[track_caller]` do not get thrown away when malformed (i.e. have arguments). This doesn't matter too much (I think), because an error gets emitted either way, so the compilation will not finish.
Start moving wf checking away from HIR
I'm trying to only access the HIR in the error path. My hope is that once we move significant portions of wfcheck off HIR that incremental will be able to cache wfcheck queries significantly better.
I think I am reaching a blocker because we normally need to provide good spans to `ObligationCause`, so that the trait solver can report good errors. In some cases I have been able to use bad spans and improve them depending on the `ObligationCauseCode` (by loading HIR in the case where we actually want to error). To scale that further we'll likely need to remove spans from the `ObligationCause` entirely (leaving it to some variants of `ObligationCauseCode` to have a span when they can't recompute the information later). Unsure this is the right approach, but we've already been using it. I will create an MCP about it, but that should not affect this PR, which is fairly limited in where it does those kind of tricks.
Especially b862d8828e is interesting here, because I think it improves spans in all cases
In order to expose edition dependent divergences in some tests in the test suite, add explicit `edition` annotations. Some of these tests might require additional work to *avoid* the divergences, as they might have been unintentional. These are not exhaustive changes, purely opportunistic while looking at something else.
Error on invalid signatures for interrupt ABIs
We recently added `extern "custom"`, which must have type `fn()`. The various `extern "interrupt"` ABIs impose similar constraints on the signature of functions with that ABI: `x86-interrupt` should not have a return type (linting on the exact argument types is left as future work), and the other interrupt ABIs cannot have any parameters or a return type.
r? ```@workingjubilee```
Add `#[loop_match]` for improved DFA codegen
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132306
project goal: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/issues/258
This PR adds the `#[loop_match]` attribute, which aims to improve code generation for state machines. For some (very exciting) benchmarks, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/issues/258#issuecomment-2732965199
Currently, a very restricted syntax pattern is accepted. We'd like to get feedback and merge this now before we go too far in a direction that others have concerns with.
## current state
We accept code that looks like this
```rust
#[loop_match]
loop {
state = 'blk: {
match state {
State::A => {
#[const_continue]
break 'blk State::B
}
State::B => { /* ... */ }
/* ... */
}
}
}
```
- a loop should have the same semantics with and without `#[loop_match]`: normal `continue` and `break` continue to work
- `#[const_continue]` is only allowed in loops annotated with `#[loop_match]`
- the loop body needs to have this particular shape (a single assignment to the match scrutinee, with the body a labelled block containing just a match)
## future work
- perform const evaluation on the `break` value
- support more state/scrutinee types
## maybe future work
- allow `continue 'label value` syntax, which `#[const_continue]` could then use.
- allow the match to be on an arbitrary expression (e.g. `State::Initial`)
- attempt to also optimize `break`/`continue` expressions that are not marked with `#[const_continue]`
r? ``@traviscross``
Implement parsing of pinned borrows
This PR implements part of #130494.
EDIT: It introduces `&pin mut $place` and `&pin const $place` as sugars for `std::pin::pin!($place)` and its shared reference equivalent, except that `$place` will not be moved when borrowing. The borrow check will be in charge of enforcing places cannot be moved or mutably borrowed since being pinned till dropped.
### Implementation steps:
- [x] parse the `&pin mut $place` and `&pin const $place` syntaxes
- [ ] borrowck of `&pin mut|const`
- [ ] support autoref of `&pin mut|const` when needed
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#142645 (Also emit suggestions for usages in the `non_upper_case_globals` lint)
- rust-lang/rust#142657 (mbe: Clean up code with non-optional `NonterminalKind`)
- rust-lang/rust#142799 (rustc_session: Add a structure for keeping both explicit and default sysroots)
- rust-lang/rust#142805 (Emit a single error when importing a path with `_`)
- rust-lang/rust#142882 (Lazy init diagnostics-only local_names in borrowck)
- rust-lang/rust#142883 (Add impl_trait_in_bindings tests from rust-lang/rust#61773)
- rust-lang/rust#142943 (Don't include current rustc version string in feature removed help)
- rust-lang/rust#142965 ([RTE-497] Ignore `c-link-to-rust-va-list-fn` test on SGX platform)
- rust-lang/rust#142972 (Add a missing mailmap entry)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
The version string is difficult to properly normalize out, and removing
it isn't a huge deal (the user can query version info easily through
`rustc --version` or `cargo --version`).
The normalization options were all non-ideal:
- Per-test version string normalization is nasty to maintain, and we
need to maintain `n` copies of it.
- Centralized compiletest normalization (with a directive opt-out) is
also not ideal, because `cfg(version(..))` tests can't have those
accidentally normalized out (and you'd have to remember to opt-out).
