Make two transmute-related MIR lints into HIR lint
Make `PTR_TO_INTEGER_TRANSMUTE_IN_CONSTS` (rust-lang/rust#130540) and `UNNECESSARY_TRANSMUTES` (rust-lang/rust#136083) into "normal" HIR-based lints.
Funny enough this came up in the review of the latter (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/136083#issuecomment-2614301413), but I guess it just was overlooked.
But anywyas, there's no reason for these to be MIR lints; in fact, it makes the suggestions for them a bit more complicated than necessary.
Note that there's probably a few more simplifications and improvements to be done here. Follow-ups can be done in a separate PR, especially if they're about the messaging and suggestions themselves, which I didn't write.
Add some track_caller info to precondition panics
Currently, when you encounter a precondition check, you'll always get the caller location of the implementation of the precondition checks. But with this PR, you'll be told the location of the invalid call. Which is useful.
I thought of this while looking at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/129642#issuecomment-2311703898.
The changes to `tests/ui/const*` happen because the const-eval interpreter skips `#[track_caller]` frames in its backtraces.
The perf implications of this are:
* Increased debug binary sizes. The caller_location implementation requires that the additional data we want to display here be stored in const allocations, which are deduplicated but not across crates. There is no impact on optimized build sizes. The panic path and the caller location data get optimized out.
* The compile time hit to opt-incr-patched bitmaps happens because the patch changes the line number of some function calls with precondition checks, causing us to go from 0 dirty CGUs to 1 dirty CGU.
* The other compile time hits are marginal but real, and due to doing a handful of new queries. Adding more useful data isn't completely free.
remove intrinsics::drop_in_place
This was only ever accidentally stable, and has been marked as deprecated since Rust 1.52, released almost 4 years ago. We've removed the old serialization `derive`s, maybe we can remove this one as well?
As suggested by ``@jhpratt,`` let's see what crater says for this one.
stabilize ptr::swap_nonoverlapping in const
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133668
The blocking issue mentioned there is resolved by documentation. We may in the future actually support such code, but that is blocked on https://github.com/rust-lang/const-eval/issues/72 which is non-trivial to implement. Meanwhile, this completes stabilization of all `const fn` in `ptr`. :)
Here's a version of the problematic example to play around with:
https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=6c390452379fb593e109b8f8ee854d2a
Should be FCP'd with both `@rust-lang/libs-api` and `@rust-lang/lang` since `swap_nonoverlapping` is documented to work as an "untyped" operation but due to the limitation mentioned above, that's not entirely true during const evaluation. I expect this limitation will only be hit in niche corner cases, so the benefits of having this function work most of the time outweigh the downsides of users running into this problem. (Note that unsafe code could already hit this limitation before this PR by doing cursed pointer casts, but having it hidden inside `swap_nonoverlapping` feels a bit different.)
Don't allow flattened format_args in const.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/139136
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/139621
We allow `format_args!("a")` in const, but don't allow any format_args with arguments in const, such as `format_args!("{}", arg)`.
However, we accidentally allow `format_args!("hello {}", "world")` in const, as it gets flattened to `format_args!("hello world")`.
This also applies to panic in const.
This wasn't supposed to happen. I added protection against this in the format args flattening code, ~~but I accidentally marked a function as const that shouldn't have been const~~ but this was removed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135139.
This is a breaking change. The crater found no breakage, however.
This breaks things like:
```rust
const _: () = if false { panic!("a {}", "a") };
```
and
```rust
const F: std::fmt::Arguments<'static> = format_args!("a {}", "a");
```
Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals`
Closes#131204
`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated
This will end up conflicting with the test in #138293 so whichever doesn't land first will need updating
--
# Stabilization Report
## General design
### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized?
[RFC 3695](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695), none.
### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.
None
### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?
None
## Has a call-for-testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?
Yes; only positive feedback was received.
## Implementation quality
### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)
Implemented in [#131034](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131034).
### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature
- [Basic usage, including `#[cfg()]`, `cfg!()` and `#[cfg_attr()]`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/true-false.rs)
- [`--cfg=true/false` on the command line being accessible via `r#true/r#false`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/raw-true-false.rs)
- [Interaction with the unstable `#[doc(cfg(..))]` feature](6d71251/tests/rustdoc-ui/cfg-boolean-literal.rs)
- [Denying `--check-cfg=cfg(true/false)`](6d71251/tests/ui/check-cfg/invalid-arguments.rs)
- Ensuring `--cfg false` on the command line doesn't change the meaning of `cfg(false)`: `tests/ui/cfg/cmdline-false.rs`
- Ensuring both `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)` on the same item result in it being disabled: `tests/ui/cfg/both-true-false.rs`
### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?
The above mentioned issue; it should not block as it interacts with another unstable feature.
### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there?
None
### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization
- `@clubby789` (RFC)
- `@Urgau` (Implementation in rustc)
### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?
`rustdoc`'s unstable`#[doc(cfg(..)]` has been updated to respect it. `cargo` has been updated with a forward compatibility lint to enable supporting it in cargo once stabilized.
## Type system and execution rules
### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)
A few lines to be added to the reference for configuration predicates, specified in the RFC.
UI tests: migrate remaining compile time `error-pattern`s to line annotations when possible
There's a number of cases in which `error-pattern` is still necessary even for compile time checking.
- It checks something that compiler writes directly into stderr as text, and not to the structured json output. This includes some stuff reported during compiler panics, and also diagnostics that happen very early, for example when parsing the command line.
- It checks something that exists only in the full rendered diagnostic test, but not in its structured components, for example code fragments or output of `-Ztrack-diagnostics`. (The latter can probably be converted to structured form though.)
This is continuation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139137.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Fix breakage when running compiletest with `--test-args=--edition=2015`
Compiletest has an `--edition` flag to change the default edition tests are run with. Unfortunately no test suite successfully executes when that flag is passed. If the edition is set to something greater than 2015 the breakage is expected, since the test suite currently supports only edition 2015 (Ferrous Systems will open an MCP about fixing that soonish). Surprisingly, the test suite is also broken if `--edition=2015` is passed to compiletest. This PR focuses on fixing the latter.
This PR fixes the two categories of failures happening when `--edition=2015` is passed:
* Some edition-specific tests set their edition through `//@ compile-flags` instead of `//@ edition`. Compiletest doesn't parse the compile flags, so it would see no `//@ edition` and add another `--edition` flag, leading to a rustc error.
* Compiletest would add the edition after `//@ compile-flags`, while some tests depend on flags passed to `//@ compile-flags` being the last flags in the rustc invocation.
Note that for the first category, I opted to manually go and replace all `//@ compile-flags` setting an edition with an explicit `//@ edition`. We could've changed compiletest to instead check whether an edition was set in `//@ compile-flags`, but I thought it was better to enforce a consistent way to set the edition in tests.
I also added the edition to the stamp, so that changing `--edition` results in tests being re-executed.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Improve `AssocItem::descr`.
The commit adds "associated" to the description of associated types and associated consts, to match the description of associated functions. This increases error message precision and consistency with `AssocKind::fmt`.
The commit also notes an imperfection in `AssocKind::fmt`; fixing this imperfection is possible but beyond the scope of this PR.
r? `@estebank`
The commit adds "associated" to the description of associated types and
associated consts, to match the description of associated functions.
This increases error message precision and consistency with
`AssocKind::fmt`.
The commit also notes an imperfection in `AssocKind::fmt`; fixing this
imperfection is possible but beyond the scope of this PR.
UI tests: add missing diagnostic kinds where possible
The subset of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139427 that only adds diagnostic kinds to line annotations, without changing any other things in annotations or compiletest.
After this only non-viral `NOTE`s and `HELP`s should be missing.
r? `@jieyouxu`
literal pattern lowering: use the pattern's type instead of the literal's in `const_to_pat`
This has two purposes:
- First, it enables removing the `treat_byte_string_as_slice` fields from `TypeckResults` and `ConstToPat`. A byte string pattern's type will be `&[u8]` when matching on a slice reference, so `const_to_pat` will lower it to a slice ref pattern. I believe this is tested by `tests/ui/match/pattern-deref-miscompile.rs`.
- Second, it will simplify the implementation of byte string literals in deref patterns. If byte string patterns can be given the type `[u8; N]` or `[u8]` during HIR typeck, then nothing needs to be changed in `const_to_pat` in order to lower the patterns `deref!(b"..."): Vec<u8>` and `deref!(b"..."): Box<[u8; 3]>`.
Implementation-wise, this uses `lit_to_const` to make a const with the pattern's type and the literal's valtree; that feels to me like the best way to make sure that the valtree representations of the pattern type and literal are the same. Though it may necessitate later changes to `lit_to_const` to accommodate giving byte string literal patterns non-reference types—would that be reasonable?
This unfortunately doesn't work for the `string_deref_patterns` feature (since that gives string literal patterns the `String` type), so I added a workaround for that. However, once `deref_patterns` supports string literals, it may be able to replace `string_deref_patterns`; the special case for `String` can removed at that point.
r? ``@oli-obk``
remove `feature(inline_const_pat)`
Summarizing https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/144729-t-types/topic/remove.20feature.28inline_const_pat.29.20and.20shared.20borrowck.
With https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/issues/129 we will start to borrowck items together with their typeck parent. This is necessary to correctly support opaque types, blocking the new solver and TAIT/ATPIT stabilization with the old one. This means that we cannot really support `inline_const_pat` as they are implemented right now:
- we want to typeck inline consts together with their parent body to allow inference to flow both ways and to allow the const to refer to local regions of its parent.This means we also need to borrowck the inline const together with its parent as that's necessary to properly support opaque types
- we want the inline const pattern to participate in exhaustiveness checking
- to participate in exhaustiveness checking we need to evaluate it, which requires borrowck, which now relies on borrowck of the typeck root, which ends up checking exhaustiveness again. **This is a query cycle**.
There are 4 possible ways to handle this:
- stop typechecking inline const patterns together with their parent
- causes inline const patterns to be different than inline const exprs
- prevents bidirectional inference, we need to either fail to compile `if let const { 1 } = 1u32` or `if let const { 1u32 } = 1`
- region inference for inline consts will be harder, it feels non-trivial to support inline consts referencing local regions from the parent fn
- inline consts no longer participate in exhaustiveness checking. Treat them like `pat if pat == const { .. }` instead. We then only evaluate them after borrowck
- difference between `const { 1 }` and `const FOO: usize = 1; match x { FOO => () }`. This is confusing
- do they carry their weight if they are now just equivalent to using an if-guard
- delay exhaustiveness checking until after borrowck
- should be possible in theory, but is a quite involved change and may have some unexpected challenges
- remove this feature for now
I believe we should either delay exhaustiveness checking or remove the feature entirely. As moving exhaustiveness checking to after borrow checking is quite complex I think the right course of action is to fully remove the feature for now and to add it again once/if we've got that implementation figured out.
`const { .. }`-expressions remain stable. These seem to have been the main motivation for https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/2920.
r? types
cc `@rust-lang/types` `@rust-lang/lang` #76001
compiletest: Support matching on diagnostics without a span
Using `//~? ERROR my message` on any line of the test.
The new checks are exhaustive, like all other `//~` checks, and unlike the `error-pattern` directive that is sometimes used now to check for span-less diagnostics.
This will allow to eliminate most on `error-pattern` directives in compile-fail tests (except those that are intentionally imprecise due to platform-specific diagnostics).
I didn't migrate any of `error-pattern`s in this PR though, except those where the migration was necessary for the tests to pass.
