improve error message shown for unsafe operations
Add a short explanation saying why undefined behavior could arise. In particular, the error many people got for "creating a pointer to a packed field requires unsafe block" was not worded great -- it lead to people just adding the unsafe block without considering if what they are doing follows the rules.
I am not sure if a "note" is the right thing, but that was the easiest thing to add...
Inspired by @gnzlbg at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/46043#issuecomment-381544673
use the adjusted type for cat_pattern in tuple patterns
This looks like a typo introduced in #51686.
Fixes#52213.
r? @pnkfelix
beta + stable nominating because regression + unsoundness.
Implement #[alloc_error_handler]
This to-be-stable attribute is equivalent to `#[lang = "oom"]`. It is required when using the `alloc` crate without the `std` crate. It is called by `handle_alloc_error`, which is in turned called by "infallible" allocations APIs such as `Vec::push`.
This to-be-stable attribute is equivalent to `#[lang = "oom"]`.
It is required when using the alloc crate without the std crate.
It is called by `handle_alloc_error`, which is in turned called
by "infallible" allocations APIs such as `Vec::push`.
refactor and cleanup region errors for NLL
This is a WIP commit. It simplifies some of the code from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/51536 and extends a few more steps towards the errors that @davidtwco and I were shooting for. These are intended as a replacement for the general "unable to infer lifetime" messages -- one that is actually actionable. We're certainly not there yet, but the overall shape hopefully gets a bit clearer.
I'm thinking about trying to open up an internals thread to sketch out the overall plan and perhaps discuss how to get the wording right, which special cases to handle, etc.
r? @estebank
cc @davidtwco
[NLL] Use better span for initializing a variable twice
Closes#51217
When assigning to a (projection from a) local immutable local which starts initialised (everything except `let PATTERN;`):
* Point to the declaration of that local
* Make the error message refer to the local, rather than the projection.
r? @nikomatsakis
Show known meta items in unknown meta items error
This PR adds a label to E0541. It also factors built-in attribute parsing into a submodule of `attr` for ease of future refactoring.
Fixes#51469.
Loosened rules involving statics mentioning other statics
Before this PR, trying to mention a static in any way other than taking a reference to it caused a compile-time error. So, while
```rust
static A: u32 = 42;
static B: &u32 = &A;
```
compiles successfully,
```rust
static A: u32 = 42;
static B: u32 = A; // error
```
and
```rust
static A: u32 = 42;
static B: u32 = *&A; // error
```
are not possible to express in Rust. On the other hand, introducing an intermediate `const fn` can presently allow one to do just that:
```rust
static A: u32 = 42;
static B: u32 = foo(&A); // success!
const fn foo(a: &u32) -> u32 {
*a
}
```
Preventing `const fn` from allowing to work around the ban on reading from statics would cripple `const fn` almost into uselessness.
Additionally, the limitation for reading from statics comes from the old const evaluator(s) and is not shared by `miri`.
This PR loosens the rules around use of statics to allow statics to evaluate other statics by value, allowing all of the above examples to compile and run successfully.
Reads from extern (foreign) statics are however still disallowed by miri, because there is no compile-time value to be read.
```rust
extern static A: u32;
static B: u32 = A; // error
```
This opens up a new avenue of potential issues, as a static can now not just refer to other statics or read from other statics, but even contain references that point into itself.
While it might seem like this could cause subtle bugs like allowing a static to be initialized by its own value, this is inherently impossible in miri.
Reading from a static causes the `const_eval` query for that static to be invoked. Calling the `const_eval` query for a static while already inside the `const_eval` query of said static will cause cycle errors.
It is not possible to accidentally create a bug in miri that would enable initializing a static with itself, because the memory of the static *does not exist* while being initialized.
The memory is not uninitialized, it is not there. Thus any change that would accidentally allow reading from a not yet initialized static would cause ICEs.
Tests have been modified according to the new rules, and new tests have been added for writing to `static mut`s within definitions of statics (which needs to fail), and incremental compilation with complex/interlinking static definitions.
Note that incremental compilation did not need to be adjusted, because all of this was already possible before with workarounds (like intermediate `const fn`s) and the encoding/decoding already supports all the possible cases.
r? @eddyb
Speed up compilation of large constant arrays
This is a different approach to #51672 as suggested by @oli-obk. Rather
than write each repeated value one-by-one, we write the first one and
then copy its value directly into the remaining memory.
With this change, the [toy program](c2f4744d2d/src/test/run-pass/mir_heavy_promoted.rs) goes from 63 seconds to 19 seconds on my machine.
Edit: Inlining `Size::bytes()` saves an additional 6 seconds dropping the total time to 13 seconds on my machine.
Edit2: Now down to 2.8 seconds.
r? @oli-obk
cc @nnethercote @eddyb
[NLL] Better move errors
Make a number of changes to improve the quality of NLL cannot move errors.
* Group errors that occur in the same `match` with the same cause.
* Suggest `ref`, `&` or removing `*` to avoid the move.
* Show the place being matched on.
Differences from AST borrowck:
* `&` is suggested over `ref` when matching on a place that can't be moved from.
* Removing `*` is suggested instead of adding `&` when applicable.
* Sub-pattern spans aren't used, this would probably need Spans on Places.
Closes#45699Closes#46627Closes#51187Closes#51189
r? @pnkfelix
Optimize RefCell refcount tracking
Address the performance concern raised in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/51466#issuecomment-398255276
cc @dtolnay @nnethercote @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance
cc @RalfJung @jhjourdan for soundness concerns
Can somebody kick off a perf run on this? I'm not sure how that's done, but I understand it has to be started manually.
The idea of this change is to switch to representing mutable refcount as values below 0 to eliminate some branching that was required with the old algorithm.
Add a compiletest header for edition
r? @nikomatsakis
Are the `-Zunstable-options` options needed in these tests? It looks like they aren't. If not, I can remove them.
