The Generics now contain one Vec of an enum for the generic parameters,
rather than two separate Vec's for lifetime and type parameters.
Additionally, places that previously used Vec<LifetimeDef> now use
Vec<GenericParam> instead.
macros: hygienize use of `core`/`std` in builtin macros
Today, if a builtin macro wants to access an item from `core` or `std` (depending `#![no_std]`), it generates `::core::path::to::item` or `::std::path::to::item` respectively (c.f. `fn std_path()` in `libsyntax/ext/base.rs`).
This PR refactors the builtin macros to instead always emit `$crate::path::to::item` here. That is, the def site of builtin macros is taken to be in `extern crate core;` or `extern crate std;`. Since builtin macros are macros 1.0 (i.e. mostly unhygienic), changing the def site can only effect the resolution of `$crate`.
r? @nrc
Record all imports (`use`, `extern crate`) in the crate metadata
This PR adds non-`pub` `use` and `extern crate` imports in the crate metadata since hygienic macros invoked in other crates may use them. We already include all other non-`pub` items in the crate metadata. This improves import suggestions in some cases.
Fixes#42337.
r? @nrc
We issue just one message for an erroneous glob private variant reëxport
(using the Session's one-time-diagnostics capability), but individual
(non-glob) such erroneous reëxports still get their own messages. The
suggestion to make the enum public is also one-time.
The enum variant reëxport error didn't have an associated error code
(and remedying this here is deemed out of the scope of this commit), so
we resort to the expediency of using 0 as the `DiagnosticMessageId`
value.
Adding Debug to NameResolution was helpful in development.
This resolves#46209.
Generic Associated Types Parsing & Name Resolution
Hi!
This PR adds parsing for generic associated types! 🎉🎉🎉
Tracking Issue: #44265
## Notes For Reviewers
* [x] I still need to add the stdout and stderr files to my ui tests. It takes me a *long* time to compile the compiler locally, so I'm going to add this as soon as possible in the next day or so.
* [ ] My current ui tests aren't very good or very thorough. I'm reusing the `parse_generics` and `parse_where_clause` methods from elsewhere in the parser, so my changes work without being particularly complex. I'm not sure if I should duplicate all of the generics test cases for generic associated types. It might actually be appropriate to duplicate everything here, since we don't want to rely on an implementation detail in case it changes in the future. If you think so too, I'll adapt all of the generics test cases into the generic associated types test cases.
* [ ] There is still more work required to make the run-pass tests pass here. In particular, we need to make the following errors disappear:
```
error[E0110]: lifetime parameters are not allowed on this type
--> ./src/test/run-pass/rfc1598-generic-associated-types/streaming_iterator.rs:23:41
|
23 | bar: <T as StreamingIterator>::Item<'static>,
| ^^^^^^^ lifetime parameter not allowed on this type
```
```
error[E0261]: use of undeclared lifetime name `'a`
--> ./src/test/run-pass/rfc1598-generic-associated-types/iterable.rs:15:47
|
15 | type Iter<'a>: Iterator<Item = Self::Item<'a>>;
| ^^ undeclared lifetime
```
There is a FIXME comment in streaming_iterator. If you uncomment that line, you get the following:
```
error: expected one of `!`, `+`, `,`, `::`, or `>`, found `=`
--> ./src/test/run-pass/rfc1598-generic-associated-types/streaming_iterator.rs:29:45
|
29 | fn foo<T: for<'a> StreamingIterator<Item<'a>=&'a [i32]>>(iter: T) { /* ... */ }
| ^ expected one of `!`, `+`, `,`, `::`, or `>` here
```
r? @nikomatsakis
When encountering `pub ident`, attempt to identify the code that comes
afterwards, wether it is a brace block (assume it is a struct), a paren
list followed by a colon (assume struct) or a paren list followed by a
block (assume a fn). Consume those blocks to avoid any further parser
errors and return a `Placeholder` item in order to allow the parser to
continue. In the case of unenclosed blocks, the behavior is the same as
it is currently: no further errors are processed.
Add hints for the case of confusing enum with its variants
A solution for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/43871. When one uses an enum in a place that accepts variants (e.g., `Option(result)` instead of `Some(result)`), suggest one of this enum's variants.
cc @estebank
Fix help for duplicated names: `extern crate (...) as (...)`
On the case of duplicated names caused by an `extern crate` statement
with a rename, don't include the inline suggestion, instead using a span
label with only the text to avoid incorrect rust code output.
Fix#45829.
Detect `=` -> `:` typo in let bindings
When encountering a let binding type error, attempt to parse as
initializer instead. If successful, it is likely just a typo:
```rust
fn main() {
let x: Vec::with_capacity(10);
}
```
```
error: expected type, found `10`
--> file.rs:3:31
|
3 | let x: Vec::with_capacity(10, 20);
| -- ^^
| ||
| |help: did you mean assign here?: `=`
| while parsing the type for `x`
```
Fix#43703.
On the case of duplicated names caused by an `extern crate` statement
with a rename, don't include the inline suggestion, instead using a span
label with only the text to avoid incorrect rust code output.
Make last structs indexes definitions use newtype_index macro
This PR makes the last two index structs not using newtype_index macro to use it and also fixes this https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/45763 issue.
RFC 2008: Future-proofing enums/structs with #[non_exhaustive] attribute
This work-in-progress pull request contains my changes to implement [RFC 2008](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2008). The related tracking issue is #44109.
As of writing, enum-related functionality is not included and there are some issues related to tuple/unit structs. Enum related tests are currently ignored.
WIP PR requested by @nikomatsakis [in Gitter](https://gitter.im/rust-impl-period/WG-compiler-middle?at=59e90e6297cedeb0482ade3e).
When encountering a let binding type error, attempt to parse as
initializer instead. If successful, it is likely just a typo:
```rust
fn main() {
let x: Vec::with_capacity(10);
}
```
```
error: expected type, found `10`
--> file.rs:3:31
|
3 | let x: Vec::with_capacity(10, 20);
| -- ^^
| ||
| |help: did you mean assign here?: `=`
| while parsing the type for `x`
```
[Syntax] Implement auto trait syntax
Implements `auto trait Send {}` as a substitute for `trait Send {} impl Send for .. {}`.
See the [internals thread](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-rfc-renaming-oibits-and-changing-their-declaration-syntax/3086) for motivation. Part of #13231.
The first commit is just a rename moving from "default trait" to "auto trait". The rest is parser->AST->HIR work and making it the same as the current syntax for everything below HIR. It's under the `optin_builtin_traits` feature gate.
When can we remove the old syntax? Do we need to wait for a new `stage0`? We also need to formally decide for the new form (even if the keyword is not settled yet).
Observations:
- If you `auto trait Auto {}` and then `impl Auto for .. {}` that's accepted even if it's redundant.
- The new syntax is simpler internally which will allow for a net removal of code, for example well-formedness checks are effectively moved to the parser.
- Rustfmt and clippy are broken, need to fix those.
- Rustdoc just ignores it for now.
ping @petrochenkov @nikomatsakis
DefaultImpl is a highly confusing name for what we now call auto impls,
as in `impl Send for ..`. The name auto impl is not formally decided
but for sanity anything is better than `DefaultImpl` which refers
neither to `default impl` nor to `impl Default`.
