RFC2229: Use the correct place type
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87097
The ICE occurred because instead of looking at the type of the place after all the projections are applied, we instead looked at the `base_ty` of the Place to decide whether a discriminant should be read of not. This lead to two issues:
1. the kind of the type is not necessarily `Adt` since we only look at the `base_ty`, it could be instead `Ref` for example
2. if the kind of the type is `Adt` you could still be looking at the wrong variant to make a decision on whether the discriminant should be read or not
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Account for capture kind in auto traits migration
Modifies the current auto traits migration for RFC2229 so it takes into account capture kind
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/project-rfc-2229/issues/51
r? `@nikomatsakis`
2229: Reduce the size of closures with `capture_disjoint_fields`
One key observation while going over the closure size profile of rustc
was that we are disjointly capturing one or more fields starting at an
immutable reference.
Disjoint capture over immutable reference doesn't add too much value
because the fields can either be borrowed immutably or copied.
One possible edge case of the optimization is when a fields of a struct
have a longer lifetime than the structure, therefore we can't completely
get rid of all the accesses on top of sharef refs, only the rightmost
one. Here is a possible example:
```rust
struct MyStruct<'a> {
a: &'static A,
b: B,
c: C<'a>,
}
fn foo<'a, 'b>(m: &'a MyStruct<'b>) -> impl FnMut() + 'static {
let c = || drop(&*m.a.field_of_a);
// Here we really do want to capture `*m.a` because that outlives `'static`
// If we capture `m`, then the closure no longer outlives `'static'
// it is constrained to `'a`
}
```
r? `@nikomatsakis`
One key observation while going over the closure size profile of rustc
was that we are disjointly capturing one or more fields starting at an
immutable reference.
Disjoint capture over immutable reference doesn't add too much value
because the fields can either be borrowed immutably or copied.
One possible edge case of the optimization is when a fields of a struct
have a longer lifetime than the structure, therefore we can't completely
get rid of all the accesses on top of sharef refs, only the rightmost
one. Here is a possible example:
```rust
struct MyStruct<'a> {
a: &'static A,
b: B,
c: C<'a>,
}
fn foo<'a, 'b>(m: &'a MyStruct<'b>) -> impl FnMut() + 'static {
let c = || drop(&*m.a.field_of_a);
// Here we really do want to capture `*m.a` because that outlives `'static`
// If we capture `m`, then the closure no longer outlives `'static'
// it is constrained to `'a`
}
```
Even if the content from box is used in a sharef-ref context,
we capture the box entirerly.
This is motivated by:
1) We only capture data that is on the stack.
2) Capturing data from within the box might end up moving more data than
the user anticipated.
Introduce the beginning of a THIR unsafety checker
This poses the foundations for the THIR unsafety checker, so that it can be implemented incrementally:
- implements a rudimentary `Visitor` for the THIR (which will definitely need some tweaking in the future)
- introduces a new `-Zthir-unsafeck` flag which tells the compiler to use THIR unsafeck instead of MIR unsafeck
- implements detection of unsafe functions
- adds revisions to the UI tests to test THIR unsafeck alongside MIR unsafeck
This uses a very simple query design, where bodies are unsafety-checked on a body per body basis. This however has some big flaws:
- the unsafety-checker builds the THIR itself, which means a lot of work is duplicated with MIR building constructing its own copy of the THIR
- unsafety-checking closures is currently completely wrong: closures should take into account the "safety context" in which they are created, here we are considering that closures are always a safe context
I had intended to fix these problems in follow-up PRs since they are always gated under the `-Zthir-unsafeck` flag (which is explicitely noted to be unsound).
r? `@nikomatsakis`
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/project-thir-unsafeck/issues/3https://github.com/rust-lang/project-thir-unsafeck/issues/7
2229: Support migration via rustfix
- Adds support of machine applicable suggestions for `disjoint_capture_drop_reorder`.
- Doesn't migrate in the case of pre-existing bugs in user code
r? ``@nikomatsakis``
make changes to liveness to use closure_min_captures
use different span
borrow check uses new structures
rename to CapturedPlace
stop using upvar_capture in regionck
remove the bridge
cleanup from rebase + remove the upvar_capture reference from mutability_errors.rs
remove line from livenes test
make our unused var checking more consistent
update tests
adding more warnings to the tests
move is_ancestor_or_same_capture to rustc_middle/ty
update names to reflect the closures
add FIXME
check that all captures are immutable borrows before returning
add surrounding if statement like the original
move var out of the loop and rename
Co-authored-by: Logan Mosier <logmosier@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Roxane Fruytier <roxane.fruytier@hotmail.com>
