Mark `Parser::eat`/`check` methods as `#[must_use]`
These methods return a `bool`, but we probably should either use these values or explicitly throw them away (e.g. when we just want to unconditionally eat a token if it exists).
I changed a few places from `eat` to `expect`, but otherwise I tried to leave a comment explaining why the `eat` was okay.
This also adds a test for the `pattern_type!` macro, which used to silently accept a missing `is` token.
Detect non-lifetime binder params shadowing item params
We should check that `for<T>` shadows `T` from an item in the same way that `for<'a>` shadows `'a` from an item.
r? ``@petrochenkov`` since you're familiar w the nuances of rib kinds
allow overwriting the output of `rustc --version`
Our wonderful bisection folk [have to work around](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123276#issuecomment-2075001510) crates that do incomplete nightly/feature detection, as otherwise the bisection just points to where the feature detection breaks, and not to the actual breakage they are looking for.
This is also annoying behaviour to nightly users who did not opt-in to those nightly features. Most nightly users want to be in control of the nightly breakage they get, by
* choosing when to update rustc
* choosing when to update dependencies
* choosing which nightly features they are willing to take the breakage for
The reason this breakage occurs is that the build script of some crates run `rustc --version`, and if the version looks like nightly or dev, it will enable nightly features. These nightly features may break in random ways whenever we change something in nightly, so every release of such a crate will only work with a small range of nightly releases. This causes bisection to fail whenever it tries an unsupported nightly, even though that crate is not related to the bisection at all, but is just an unrelated dependency.
This PR (and the policy I want to establish with this FCP) is only for situations like the `version_check`'s `supports_feature` function. It is explicitly not for `autocfg` or similar feature-detection-by-building-rust-code, irrespective of my opinions on it and the similarity of nightly breakage that can occur with such schemes. These cause much less breakage, but should the breakage become an issue, they should get covered by this policy, too.
This PR allows changing the version and release strings reported by `rustc --version` via the `RUSTC_OVERRIDE_VERSION_STRING` env var. The bisection issue is then fixed by https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo-bisect-rustc/pull/335.
I mainly want to establish a compiler team policy:
> We do not consider feature detection on nightly (on stable via compiler version numbering is fine) a valid use case that we need to support, and if it causes problems, we are at liberty to do what we deem best - either actively working to prevent it or to actively ignore it. We may try to work with responsive and cooperative authors, but are not obligated to.
Should they subvert the workarounds that nightly users or cargo-bisect-rustc can use, we should be able to land rustc PRs that target the specific crates that cause issues for us and outright replace their build script's logic to disable nightly detection.
I am not including links to crates, PRs or issues here, as I don't actually care about the specific use cases and don't want to make it trivial to go there and leave comments. This discussion is going to be interesting enough on its own, without branching out.
Add limit for unclosed delimiters in lexer diagnostic
Fixes#127868
The first commit shows the original diagnostic, and the second commit shows the changes.
Delegation: support generics for delegation from free functions
(The PR was split from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/123958, explainer - https://github.com/Bryanskiy/posts/blob/master/delegation%20in%20generic%20contexts.md)
This PR implements generics inheritance from free functions to free functions and trait methods.
#### free functions to free functions:
```rust
fn to_reuse<T: Clone>(_: T) {}
reuse to_reuse as bar;
// desugaring:
fn bar<T: Clone>(x: T) {
to_reuse(x)
}
```
Generics, predicates and signature are simply copied. Generic arguments in paths are ignored during generics inheritance:
```rust
fn to_reuse<T: Clone>(_: T) {}
reuse to_reuse::<u8> as bar;
// desugaring:
fn bar<T: Clone>(x: T) {
to_reuse::<u8>(x) // ERROR: mismatched types
}
```
Due to implementation limitations callee path is lowered without modifications. Therefore, it is a compilation error at the moment.
#### free functions to trait methods:
```rust
trait Trait<'a, A> {
fn foo<'b, B>(&self, x: A, y: B) {...}
}
reuse Trait::foo;
// desugaring:
fn foo<'a, 'b, This: Trait<'a, A>, A, B>(this: &This, x: A, y: B) {
Trait::foo(this, x, y)
}
```
The inheritance is similar to the previous case but with some corrections:
- `Self` parameter converted into `T: Trait`
- generic parameters need to be reordered so that lifetimes go first
Arguments are similarly ignored.
---
In the future, we plan to support generic inheritance for delegating from all contexts to all contexts (from free/trait/impl to free/trait /impl). These cases were considered first as the simplest from the implementation perspective.
elaborate unknowable goals
A reimplemented version of #124532 affecting only the new solver. Always trying to prove super traits ends up causing a fatal overflow error in diesel, so we cannot land this in the old solver.
The following test currently does not pass coherence:
```rust
trait Super {}
trait Sub<T>: Super {}
trait Overlap<T> {}
impl<T, U: Sub<T>> Overlap<T> for U {}
impl<T> Overlap<T> for () {}
fn main() {}
```
We check whether `(): Sub<?t>` holds. This stalls with ambiguity as downstream crates may add an impl for `(): Sub<Local>`. However, its super trait bound `(): Super` cannot be implemented downstream, so this one is known not to hold.
By trying to prove that all the super bounds of a trait before adding a coherence unknowable candidate, this compiles. This is necessary to prevent breakage from enabling `-Znext-solver=coherence` (#121848), see tests/ui/coherence/super-traits/super-trait-knowable-2.rs for more details. The idea is that while there may be an impl of the trait itself we don't know about, if we're able to prove that a super trait is definitely not implemented, then that impl would also never apply/not be well-formed.
This approach is different from #124532 as it allows tests/ui/coherence/super-traits/super-trait-knowable-3.rs to compile. The approach in #124532 only elaborating the root obligations while this approach tries it for all unknowable trait goals.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #126247 (rustdoc: word wrap CamelCase in the item list table and sidebar)
- #128104 (Not lint pub structs without pub constructors intentionally)
- #128153 (Stop using `MoveDataParamEnv` for places that don't need a param-env)
- #128284 (Stabilize offset_of_nested)
- #128342 (simplify the use of `CiEnv`)
- #128355 (triagebot: make sure Nora is called Nora)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Stabilize offset_of_nested
Tracking issue #120140. Closes#120140.
As the FCP is now nearing its end I have opened a stabilization PR. I have done this separately to the offset_of_enum feature, since that FCP has not started.
`@rustbot` label F-offset_of_nested T-lang T-libs-api
Don't record trait aliases as marker traits
Don't record `#[marker]` on trait aliases, since we use that to check for the (non-presence of) associated types and other things which don't make sense of trait aliases. We already enforce this attr is only applied to a trait.
Also do the same for `#[const_trait]`, which we also enforce is only applied to a trait. This is a drive-by change, but also worthwhile just in case.
Fixes#127222
Don't elaborate associated types with Sized bounds in `trait_object_ty` in cfi
The elaboration mechanism introduced in #123005 didn't filter for associated types with `Self: Sized` bounds, which since #112319 has excluded them from the object type.
Fixes#127881
cc `@maurer` `@rcvalle`
miri: fix offset_from behavior on wildcard pointers
offset_from wouldn't behave correctly when the "end" pointer was a wildcard pointer (result of an int2ptr cast) just at the end of the allocation. Fix that by expressing the "same allocation" check in terms of two `check_ptr_access_signed` instead of something specific to offset_from, which is both more canonical and works better with wildcard pointers.
The second commit just improves diagnostics: I wanted the "pointer is dangling (has no provenance)" message to say how many bytes of memory it expected to see (since if it were 0 bytes, this would actually be legal, so it's good to tell the user that it's not 0 bytes). And then I was annoying that the error looks so different for when you deref a dangling pointer vs an out-of-bounds pointer so I made them more similar.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/3767
Stabilize `const_waker`
Closes: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/102012.
For `local_waker` and `context_ext` related things, I just ~~moved them to dedicated feature gates and reused their own tracking issue (maybe it's better to open a new one later, but at least they should not be tracked under https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/102012 from the beginning IMO.)~~ reused their own feature gates as suggested by ``@tgross35.``
``@rustbot`` label: +T-libs-api
r? libs-api
Add migration lint for 2024 prelude additions
This adds the migration lint for the newly ambiguous methods `poll` and `into_future`. When these methods are used on types implementing the respective traits, it will be ambiguous in the future, which can lead to hard errors or behavior changes depending on the exact circumstances.
tracked by #121042
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
r? compiler-errors as the method prober
This adds the migration lint for the newly ambiguous methods `poll` and
`into_future`. When these methods are used on types implementing the
respective traits, it will be ambiguous in the future, which can lead to
hard errors or behavior changes depending on the exact circumstances.
`#[naked]`: report incompatible attributes
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90957
this is a re-implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93809 by ``@bstrie`` which was closed 2 years ago due to inactivity.
This PR takes some of the final comments into account, specifically providing a little more context in error messages, and using an allow list to determine which attributes are compatible with `#[naked]`.
Notable attributes that are incompatible with `#[naked]` are:
* `#[inline]`
* `#[track_caller]`
* ~~`#[target_feature]`~~ (this is now allowed, see PR discussion)
* `#[test]`, `#[ignore]`, `#[should_panic]`
These attributes just directly conflict with what `#[naked]` should do.
Naked functions are still important for systems programming, embedded, and operating systems, so I'd like to move them forward.
Remove logic to suggest clone of function output
I can't exactly tell, but I believe that this suggestion is operating off of a heuristic that the lifetime of a function's input is correlated with the lifetime of a function's output in such a way that cloning would fix an error. I don't think that actually manages to hit the bar of "actually provides useful suggestions" most of the time.
Specifically, I've hit false-positives due to this suggestion *twice* when fixing ICEs in the compiler, so I don't think it's worthwhile having this logic around. Neither of the two affected UI tests are actually fixed by the suggestion.
improve error message when `global_asm!` uses `asm!` options
specifically, what was
error: expected one of `)`, `att_syntax`, or `raw`, found `preserves_flags`
--> $DIR/bad-options.rs:45:25
|
LL | global_asm!("", options(preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected one of `)`, `att_syntax`, or `raw`
is now
error: the `preserves_flags` option cannot be used with `global_asm!`
--> $DIR/bad-options.rs:45:25
|
LL | global_asm!("", options(preserves_flags));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the `preserves_flags` option is not meaningful for global-scoped inline assembly
mirroring the phrasing of the [reference](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/inline-assembly.html#options).
This is also a bit of a refactor for a future `naked_asm!` macro (for use in `#[naked]` functions). Currently this sort of error can come up when switching from inline to global asm, or when a user just isn't that experienced with assembly. With `naked_asm!` added to the mix hitting this error is more likely.
- merge error codes
- use attribute name that is incompatible in error message
- add test for conditional incompatible attribute
- add `linkage` to the allowlist
`missing_fragment_specifier` has been a future compatibility warning
since 2017. Uplifting it to an unconditional hard error was attempted in
2020, but eventually reverted due to fallout.
Make it an error only in edition >= 2024, leaving the lint for older
editions. This change will make it easier to support more macro syntax
that relies on usage of `$`.
Fixes <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/40107>
Improve `extern "<abi>" unsafe fn()` error message
These errors were already reported in #87217, and fixed by #87235 but missed the case of an explicit ABI.
This PR does not cover multiple keywords like `extern "C" pub const unsafe fn()`, but I don't know what a good way to cover this would be. It also seems rarer than `extern "C" unsafe` which I saw happen a few times in workshops.
Implement `Copy`/`Clone` for async closures
We can do so in the same cases that regular closures do.
For the purposes of cloning, coroutine-closures are actually precisely the same as regular closures, specifically in the aspect that `Clone` impls care about which is the upvars. The only difference b/w coroutine-closures and regular closures is the type that they *return*, but this type has not been *created* yet, so we don't really have a problem.
IDK why I didn't add this impl initially -- I went back and forth a bit on the internal representation for coroutine-closures before settling on a design which largely models regular closures. Previous (not published) iterations of coroutine-closures used to be represented as a special (read: cursed) kind of coroutine, which would probably suffer from the pitfalls that coroutines have that oli mentioned below in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/128201#issuecomment-2251230274.
r? oli-obk
Stabilize const `{integer}::from_str_radix` i.e. `const_int_from_str`
This PR stabilizes the feature `const_int_from_str`.
- ACP Issue: rust-lang/libs-team#74
- Implementation PR: rust-lang/rust#99322
- Part of Tracking Issue: rust-lang/rust#59133
API Change Diff:
```diff
impl {integer} {
- pub fn from_str_radix(src: &str, radix: u32) -> Result<Self, ParseIntError>;
+ pub const fn from_str_radix(src: &str, radix: u32) -> Result<Self, ParseIntError>;
}
impl ParseIntError {
- pub fn kind(&self) -> &IntErrorKind;
+ pub const fn kind(&self) -> &IntErrorKind;
}
```
This makes it easier to parse integers at compile-time, e.g.
the example from the Tracking Issue:
```rust
env!("SOMETHING").parse::<usize>().unwrap()
```
could now be achived with
```rust
match usize::from_str_radix(env!("SOMETHING"), 10) {
Ok(val) => val,
Err(err) => panic!("Invalid value for SOMETHING environment variable."),
}
```
rather than having to depend on a library that implements or manually implement the parsing at compile-time.
---
Checklist based on [Libs Stabilization Guide - When there's const involved](https://std-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/development/stabilization.html#when-theres-const-involved)
I am treating this as a [partial stabilization](https://std-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/development/stabilization.html#partial-stabilizations) as it shares a tracking issue (and is rather small), so directly opening the partial stabilization PR for the subset (feature `const_int_from_str`) being stabilized.
- [x] ping Constant Evaluation WG
- [x] no unsafe involved
- [x] no `#[allow_internal_unstable]`
- [ ] usage of `intrinsic::const_eval_select` rust-lang/rust#124625 in `from_str_radix_assert` to change the error message between compile-time and run-time
- [ ] [rust-labg/libs-api FCP](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124941#issuecomment-2207021921)
Support ?Trait bounds in supertraits and dyn Trait under a feature gate
This patch allows `maybe` polarity bounds under a feature gate. The only language change here is that corresponding hard errors are replaced by feature gates. Example:
```rust
#![feature(allow_maybe_polarity)]
...
trait Trait1 : ?Trait { ... } // ok
fn foo(_: Box<(dyn Trait2 + ?Trait)>) {} // ok
fn bar<T: ?Sized + ?Trait>(_: &T) {} // ok
```
Maybe bounds still don't do anything (except for `Sized` trait), however this patch will allow us to [experiment with default auto traits](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120706#issuecomment-1934006762).
This is a part of the [MCP: Low level components for async drop](https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/727)
