Store HIR attributes in a side table
Same idea as #72015 but for attributes.
The objective is to reduce incr-comp invalidations due to modified attributes.
Notably, those due to modified doc comments.
Implementation:
- collect attributes during AST->HIR lowering, in `LocalDefId -> ItemLocalId -> &[Attributes]` nested tables;
- access the attributes through a `hir_owner_attrs` query;
- local refactorings to use this access;
- remove `attrs` from HIR data structures one-by-one.
Change in behaviour:
- the HIR visitor traverses all attributes at once instead of parent-by-parent;
- attribute arrays are sometimes duplicated: for statements and variant constructors;
- as a consequence, attributes are marked as used after unused-attribute lint emission to avoid duplicate lints.
~~Current bug: the lint level is not correctly applied in `std::backtrace_rs`, triggering an unused attribute warning on `#![no_std]`. I welcome suggestions.~~
Stabilize `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` lint
This makes it possible to override the level of the `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn`, as proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71668#issuecomment-729770896.
Tracking issue: #71668
r? ```@nikomatsakis``` cc ```@SimonSapin``` ```@RalfJung```
# Stabilization report
This is a stabilization report for `#![feature(unsafe_block_in_unsafe_fn)]`.
## Summary
Currently, the body of unsafe functions is an unsafe block, i.e. you can perform unsafe operations inside.
The `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` lint, stabilized here, can be used to change this behavior, so performing unsafe operations in unsafe functions requires an unsafe block.
For now, the lint is allow-by-default, which means that this PR does not change anything without overriding the lint level.
For more information, see [RFC 2585](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2585-unsafe-block-in-unsafe-fn.md)
### Example
```rust
// An `unsafe fn` for demonstration purposes.
// Calling this is an unsafe operation.
unsafe fn unsf() {}
// #[allow(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)] by default,
// the behavior of `unsafe fn` is unchanged
unsafe fn allowed() {
// Here, no `unsafe` block is needed to
// perform unsafe operations...
unsf();
// ...and any `unsafe` block is considered
// unused and is warned on by the compiler.
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
#[warn(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]
unsafe fn warned() {
// Removing this `unsafe` block will
// cause the compiler to emit a warning.
// (Also, no "unused unsafe" warning will be emitted here.)
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
#[deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]
unsafe fn denied() {
// Removing this `unsafe` block will
// cause a compilation error.
// (Also, no "unused unsafe" warning will be emitted here.)
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
```
This gives compiler maintainers a better degree of control
over how the version gets parsed and is a good way to ensure
that there are no changes of behaviour in the future.
Also, issue a warning if the version is invalid instead of erroring
so that we stay forwards compatible with possible future changes
of the versioning scheme.
Last, this improves the present test a little.
Move some tests to more reasonable directories - 2
All tests with a score equal or greater than 1.0 were moved to their respective directories by issuing
```bash
cat FILE | tr -s " " | tr -d '():' | sort -k3 | awk '$3 >= 1' | cut -d " " -f1-2 | sed 's;\\;/;g' | xargs -n2 git mv
```
**Observation**: The first column values is the only column with results greater zero
To attest the confidentiality of the model, some manual revision of at least of tests is needed and this process will be tracked in the following list:
* `src/test/ui/abi/issue-28676.rs` OK #28676
* `src/test/ui/array-slice-vec/issue-15730.rs` OK
* `src/test/ui/associated-types/issue-24338.rs` OK #54823
* `src/test/ui/associated-types/issue-48551.rs` Looks OK #48551
* `src/test/ui/associated-types/issue-50301.rs` Looks OK #63577
...
cc #73494
r? `@petrochenkov`
Put all feature gate tests under `feature-gates/`
There was one directory that had only a single test and there was also a
test in the top-level directory. This moves both of them to
`feature-gates/`.
In which we start to parse const generics defaults
As discussed in this [zulip topic](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/260443-project-const-generics/topic/const.20generic.20defaults), this PR extracts the parsing parts from `@JulianKnodt's` PR #75384 for a better user-experience using the newly stabilized `min_const_generics` (albeit temporary) as shown in #80507: trying to use default values on const generics currently results in parse errors, as if the user didn't use the correct syntax (which is somewhat true but also misleading).
This PR extracts (and slightly modifies in a couple places) `@JulianKnodt's` parsing code (with attribution if I've done everything correctly), AST and HIR changes, and feature gate setup.
This feature is now marked as "incomplete" and thus will also print out the expected "const generics default values are unstable" error instead of a syntax error. Note that, as I've only extracted the parsing part, the actual feature will not work at all if enabled. There will be ICEs, and inference errors on the const generics default values themselves.
Fixes#80507.
Once this merges, I'll:
- modify the const generics tracking issue to refer to the `const_generics_defaults` gate rather than the older temporary name it uses there.
- create the GH `F-const_generics_defaults` label
r? `@varkor`
Part of #68490.
Care has been taken to leave the old consts where appropriate, for testing backcompat regressions, module shadowing, etc. The intrinsics docs were accidentally referring to some methods on f64 as std::f64, which I changed due to being contrary with how we normally disambiguate the shadow module from the primitive. In one other place I changed std::u8 to std::ops since it was just testing path handling in macros.
For places which have legitimate uses of the old consts, deprecated attributes have been optimistically inserted. Although currently unnecessary, they exist to emphasize to any future deprecation effort the necessity of these specific symbols and prevent them from being accidentally removed.
Rename `optin_builtin_traits` to `auto_traits`
They were originally called "opt-in, built-in traits" (OIBITs), but
people realized that the name was too confusing and a mouthful, and so
they were renamed to just "auto traits". The feature flag's name wasn't
updated, though, so that's what this PR does.
There are some other spots in the compiler that still refer to OIBITs,
but I don't think changing those now is worth it since they are internal
and not particularly relevant to this PR.
Also see <https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/opt-in.2C.20built-in.20traits.20(auto.20traits).20feature.20name>.
r? `@oli-obk` (feel free to re-assign if you're not the right reviewer for this)
resolve: Do not put macros into `module.unexpanded_invocations` unless necessary
Macro invocations in modules <sup>(*)</sup> need to be tracked because they can produce named items when expanded.
We cannot give definite answer to queries like "does this module declare name `n`?" until all macro calls in that module are expanded.
Previously we marked too many macros as potentially producing named items.
E.g. in this example
```rust
mod m {
const C: u32 = line!();
}
```
`line!()` cannot emit any items into module `m`, but it was still marked.
This PR fixes that and marks macro calls as "unexpanded in module" only if they can actually emit named items into that module.
Diagnostics in UI test outputs have different order now because this change affects macro expansion order.
<sup>*</sup> Any containers for named items are called modules in resolve (that includes blocks, traits and enums in addition to `mod` items).
They were originally called "opt-in, built-in traits" (OIBITs), but
people realized that the name was too confusing and a mouthful, and so
they were renamed to just "auto traits". The feature flag's name wasn't
updated, though, so that's what this PR does.
There are some other spots in the compiler that still refer to OIBITs,
but I don't think changing those now is worth it since they are internal
and not particularly relevant to this PR.
Also see <https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/opt-in.2C.20built-in.20traits.20(auto.20traits).20feature.20name>.
Consolidate exhaustiveness-related tests
I hunted for tests that only exercised the match exhaustiveness algorithm and regrouped them. I also improved integer-range tests since I had found them lacking while hacking around.
The interest is mainly so that one can pass `--test-args patterns` and catch most relevant tests.
r? `@varkor`
`@rustbot` modify labels: +A-exhaustiveness-checking
Make bad "rust-call" arguments no longer ICE
The simplest of bad rust-call definitions will no longer cause an ICE. There is a FIXME added for future work, as I wanted to get this easy fix in before trying to either add a hack or mess with the whole obligation system
fixes#22565
replace `#[allow_internal_unstable]` with `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` for `const fn`s
`#[allow_internal_unstable]` is currently used to side-step feature gate and stability checks.
While it was originally only meant to be used only on macros, its use was expanded to `const fn`s.
This pr adds stricter checks for the usage of `#[allow_internal_unstable]` (only on macros) and introduces the `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` attribute for usage on `const fn`s.
This pr does not change any of the functionality associated with the use of `#[allow_internal_unstable]` on macros or the usage of `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` (instead of `#[allow_internal_unstable]`) on `const fn`s (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69399#issuecomment-712911540).
Note: The check for `#[rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable]` currently only validates that the attribute is used on a function, because I don't know how I would check if the function is a `const fn` at the place of the check. I therefore openend this as a 'draft pull request'.
Closesrust-lang/rust#69399
r? @oli-obk
allow_internal_unstable is currently used
to side-step feature gate and stability checks.
While it was originally only meant to be used
only on macros, its use was expanded to
const functions.
This commit prepares stricter checks for the usage of allow_internal_unstable (only on macros)
and introduces the rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable attribute for usage on functions.
See rust-lang/rust#69399
