Remove some unncessary spaces from pretty-printed tokenstream output
In addition to making the output look nicer for all crates, this also
aligns the pretty-printing output with what the `rental` crate expects.
This will allow us to eventually disable a backwards-compat hack in a
follow-up PR.
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84428 for some background information about why we want to make this change. Note that this change would be desirable (but not particularly necessary) even if `rental` didn't exist, so we're not adding any crate-specific hacks into the compiler.
In addition to making the output look nicer for all crates, this also
aligns the pretty-printing output with what the `rental` crate expects.
This will allow us to eventually disable a backwards-compat hack in a
follow-up PR.
Warn about unused `pub` fields in non-`pub` structs
This pull request fixes#85255. The current implementation of dead code analysis is too prudent because it marks all `pub` fields of structs as live, even though they cannot be accessed from outside of the current crate if the struct itself only has restricted or private visibility.
I have changed this behavior to take the containing struct's visibility into account when looking at field visibility and liveness. This also makes dead code warnings more consistent; consider the example given in #85255:
```rust
struct Foo {
a: i32,
pub b: i32,
}
struct Bar;
impl Bar {
fn a(&self) -> i32 { 5 }
pub fn b(&self) -> i32 { 6 }
}
fn main() {
let _ = Foo { a: 1, b: 2 };
let _ = Bar;
}
```
Current nightly already warns about `Bar::b()`, even though it is `pub` (but `Bar` is not). It should therefore also warn about `Foo::b`, which it does with the changes in this PR.
Improve error message for non-exhaustive matches on non-exhaustive enums
This pull request fixes#85227. For an enum marked with `#[non_exhaustive]` and not defined in the current crate, the error message for non-exhaustive matches now mentions the fact that the enum is marked as non-exhaustive:
```
error[E0004]: non-exhaustive patterns: `_` not covered
--> main.rs:12:11
|
12 | match e {
| ^ pattern `_` not covered
|
= help: ensure that all possible cases are being handled, possibly by adding wildcards or more match arms
= note: the matched value is of type `E`, which is marked as non-exhaustive
```
Add support for const operands and options to global_asm!
On x86, the default syntax is also switched to Intel to match asm!.
Currently `global_asm!` only supports `const` operands and the `att_syntax` option. In the future, `sym` operands will also be supported. However there is no plan to support any of the other operand types or options since they don't make sense in the context of `global_asm!`.
r? `@nagisa`
have on_completion record subcycles
have on_completion record subcycles
Rework `on_completion` method so that it removes all
provisional cache entries that are "below" a completed
node (while leaving those entries that are not below
the node).
This corrects an imprecise result that could in turn lead
to an incremental compilation failure. Under the old
scheme, if you had:
* A depends on...
* B depends on A
* C depends on...
* D depends on C
* T: 'static
then the provisional results for A, B, C, and D would all
be entangled. Thus, if A was `EvaluatedToOkModuloRegions`
(because of that final condition), then the result for C and
D would also be demoted to "ok modulo regions".
In reality, though, the result for C depends only on C and itself,
and is not dependent on regions. If we happen to evaluate the
cycle starting from C, we would never reach A, and hence the
result would be "ok".
Under the new scheme, the provisional results for C and D
are moved to the permanent cache immediately and are not affected
by the result of A.
Fixes#83538
r? `@Aaron1011`
Fix diagnostic for cross crate private tuple struct constructors
Fixes#78708.
There was already some limited support for certain cross-crate scenarios but that didn't handle a tuple struct rexported from an inner module for example (e.g. the NonZero* types as seen in #85049).
```Rust
➜ cat bug.rs
fn main() {
let _x = std::num::NonZeroU32(12);
let n = std::num::NonZeroU32::new(1).unwrap();
match n {
std::num::NonZeroU32(i) => {},
}
}
```
**Before:**
<details>
```Rust
➜ rustc +nightly bug.rs
error[E0423]: expected function, tuple struct or tuple variant, found struct `std::num::NonZeroU32`
--> bug.rs:2:14
|
2 | let _x = std::num::NonZeroU32(12);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: use struct literal syntax instead: `std::num::NonZeroU32 { 0: val }`
|
::: /home/luqman/.rustup/toolchains/nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/num/nonzero.rs:148:1
[snip]
error[E0532]: expected tuple struct or tuple variant, found struct `std::num::NonZeroU32`
--> bug.rs:5:9
|
5 | std::num::NonZeroU32(i) => {},
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: use struct pattern syntax instead: `std::num::NonZeroU32 { 0 }`
|
::: /home/luqman/.rustup/toolchains/nightly-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/rustlib/src/rust/library/core/src/num/nonzero.rs:148:1
[snip]
error: aborting due to 2 previous errors
Some errors have detailed explanations: E0423, E0532.
For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0423`.
```
</details>
**After:**
<details>
```Rust
➜ /rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1/bin/rustc bug.rs
error[E0423]: cannot initialize a tuple struct which contains private fields
--> bug.rs:2:14
|
2 | let _x = std::num::NonZeroU32(12);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: constructor is not visible here due to private fields
--> /rust/library/core/src/num/nonzero.rs:148:1
[snip]
error[E0532]: cannot match against a tuple struct which contains private fields
--> bug.rs:5:9
|
5 | std::num::NonZeroU32(i) => {},
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: constructor is not visible here due to private fields
--> bug.rs:5:30
|
5 | std::num::NonZeroU32(i) => {},
| ^ private field
error: aborting due to 2 previous errors
Some errors have detailed explanations: E0423, E0532.
For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0423`.
```
</details>
One question is if we should only collect the needed info for the cross-crate case after encountering an error instead of always doing it. Perf run perhaps to gauge the impact.
Remove rustc_args_required_const attribute
Now that stdarch no longer needs it (thanks `@Amanieu!),` we can kill the `rustc_args_required_const` attribute. This means that lifetime extension of references to temporaries is the only remaining job that promotion is performing. :-)
r? `@oli-obk`
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69493
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
Rework `on_completion` method so that it removes all
provisional cache entries that are "below" a completed
node (while leaving those entries that are not below
the node).
This corrects an imprecise result that could in turn lead
to an incremental compilation failure. Under the old
scheme, if you had:
* A depends on...
* B depends on A
* C depends on...
* D depends on C
* T: 'static
then the provisional results for A, B, C, and D would all
be entangled. Thus, if A was `EvaluatedToOkModuloRegions`
(because of that final condition), then the result for C and
D would also be demoted to "ok modulo regions".
In reality, though, the result for C depends only on C and itself,
and is not dependent on regions. If we happen to evaluate the
cycle starting from C, we would never reach A, and hence the
result would be "ok".
Under the new scheme, the provisional results for C and D
are moved to the permanent cache immediately and are not affected
by the result of A.
This attribute will cause us to invoke evaluate on every where clause of an
invoked function and to generate an error with the result.
Without this, it is very difficult to observe the effects of invoking the trait
evaluator.
Suggest adding a type parameter for impls
Add a new suggestion upon encountering an unknown type in a `impl` that suggests adding a new type parameter. This diagnostic suggests to add a new type parameter even though it may be a const parameter, however after adding the parameter and running rustc again a follow up error steers the user to change the type parameter to a const parameter.
```rust
struct X<const C: ()>();
impl X<C> {}
```
suggests
```
error[E0412]: cannot find type `C` in this scope
--> bar.rs:2:8
|
1 | struct X<const C: ()>();
| ------------------------ similarly named struct `X` defined here
2 | impl X<C> {}
| ^
|
help: a struct with a similar name exists
|
2 | impl X<X> {}
| ^
help: you might be missing a type parameter
|
2 | impl<C> X<C> {}
| ^^^
```
After adding a type parameter the code now becomes
```rust
struct X<const C: ()>();
impl<C> X<C> {}
```
and the error now fully steers the user towards the correct code
```
error[E0747]: type provided when a constant was expected
--> bar.rs:2:11
|
2 | impl<C> X<C> {}
| ^
|
help: consider changing this type parameter to be a `const` generic
|
2 | impl<const C: ()> X<C> {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^
```
r? `@estebank`
Somewhat related #84946
Handle more span edge cases in generics diagnostics
This should fix invalid suggestions that didn't account for empty bracket pairs (`<>`) or type bindings.
Recover from invalid `struct` item syntax
Parse unsupported "default field const values":
```rust
struct S {
field: Type = const_val,
}
```
Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion:
```rust
struct S {
field; Type,
field2= Type,
}
```
Add auto traits and clone trait migrations for RFC2229
This PR
- renames the existent RFC2229 migration `disjoint_capture_drop_reorder` to `disjoint_capture_migration`
- add additional migrations for auto traits and clone trait
Closesrust-lang/project-rfc-2229#29Closesrust-lang/project-rfc-2229#28
r? `@nikomatsakis`
This PR implements span quoting, allowing proc-macros to produce spans
pointing *into their own crate*. This is used by the unstable
`proc_macro::quote!` macro, allowing us to get error messages like this:
```
error[E0412]: cannot find type `MissingType` in this scope
--> $DIR/auxiliary/span-from-proc-macro.rs:37:20
|
LL | pub fn error_from_attribute(_args: TokenStream, _input: TokenStream) -> TokenStream {
| ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- in this expansion of procedural macro `#[error_from_attribute]`
...
LL | field: MissingType
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ not found in this scope
|
::: $DIR/span-from-proc-macro.rs:8:1
|
LL | #[error_from_attribute]
| ----------------------- in this macro invocation
```
Here, `MissingType` occurs inside the implementation of the proc-macro
`#[error_from_attribute]`. Previosuly, this would always result in a
span pointing at `#[error_from_attribute]`
This will make many proc-macro-related error message much more useful -
when a proc-macro generates code containing an error, users will get an
error message pointing directly at that code (within the macro
definition), instead of always getting a span pointing at the macro
invocation site.
This is implemented as follows:
* When a proc-macro crate is being *compiled*, it causes the `quote!`
macro to get run. This saves all of the sapns in the input to `quote!`
into the metadata of *the proc-macro-crate* (which we are currently
compiling). The `quote!` macro then expands to a call to
`proc_macro::Span::recover_proc_macro_span(id)`, where `id` is an
opaque identifier for the span in the crate metadata.
* When the same proc-macro crate is *run* (e.g. it is loaded from disk
and invoked by some consumer crate), the call to
`proc_macro::Span::recover_proc_macro_span` causes us to load the span
from the proc-macro crate's metadata. The proc-macro then produces a
`TokenStream` containing a `Span` pointing into the proc-macro crate
itself.
The recursive nature of 'quote!' can be difficult to understand at
first. The file `src/test/ui/proc-macro/quote-debug.stdout` shows
the output of the `quote!` macro, which should make this eaier to
understand.
This PR also supports custom quoting spans in custom quote macros (e.g.
the `quote` crate). All span quoting goes through the
`proc_macro::quote_span` method, which can be called by a custom quote
macro to perform span quoting. An example of this usage is provided in
`src/test/ui/proc-macro/auxiliary/custom-quote.rs`
Custom quoting currently has a few limitations:
In order to quote a span, we need to generate a call to
`proc_macro::Span::recover_proc_macro_span`. However, proc-macros
support renaming the `proc_macro` crate, so we can't simply hardcode
this path. Previously, the `quote_span` method used the path
`crate::Span` - however, this only works when it is called by the
builtin `quote!` macro in the same crate. To support being called from
arbitrary crates, we need access to the name of the `proc_macro` crate
to generate a path. This PR adds an additional argument to `quote_span`
to specify the name of the `proc_macro` crate. Howver, this feels kind
of hacky, and we may want to change this before stabilizing anything
quote-related.
Additionally, using `quote_span` currently requires enabling the
`proc_macro_internals` feature. The builtin `quote!` macro
has an `#[allow_internal_unstable]` attribute, but this won't work for
custom quote implementations. This will likely require some additional
tricks to apply `allow_internal_unstable` to the span of
`proc_macro::Span::recover_proc_macro_span`.
Parse unsupported "default field const values":
```rust
struct S {
field: Type = const_val,
}
```
Recover from small `:` typo and provide suggestion:
```rust
struct S {
field; Type,
field2= Type,
}
```
Use .name_str() to format primitive types in error messages
This pull request fixes#84976. The problem described there is caused by this code
506e75cbf8/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/error.rs (L161-L166)
using `Debug` formatting (`{:?}`), while the proper solution is to call `name_str()` of `ty::IntTy`, `ty::UintTy` and `ty::FloatTy`, respectively.
Emit errors/warns on some wrong uses of rustdoc attributes
This PR adds a few diagnostics:
- error if conflicting `#[doc(inline)]`/`#[doc(no_inline)]` are found
- introduce the `invalid_doc_attributes` lint (warn-by-default) which triggers:
- if a crate-level attribute is used on a non-`crate` item
- if `#[doc(inline)]`/`#[doc(no_inline)]` is used on a non-`use` item
The code could probably be improved but I wanted to get feedback first. Also, some of those changes could be considered breaking changes, so I don't know what the procedure would be? ~~And finally, for the warnings, they are currently hard warnings, maybe it would be better to introduce a lint?~~ (EDIT: introduced the `invalid_doc_attributes` lint)
Closes#80275.
r? `@jyn514`
Fix stack overflow when checking for structural recursion
This pull request aims to fix#74224 and fix#84611. The current logic for detecting ADTs with structural recursion is flawed because it only looks at the root type, and then for exact matches. What I mean by this is that for examples such as:
```rust
struct A<T> {
x: T,
y: A<A<T>>,
}
struct B {
z: A<usize>
}
fn main() {}
```
When checking `A`, the compiler correctly determines that it has an infinite size (because the "root" type is `A`, and `A` occurs, albeit with different type arguments, as a nested type in `A`).
However, when checking `B`, it also recurses into `A`, but now `B` is the root type, and it only checks for _exact_ matches of `A`, but since `A` never precisely contains itself (only `A<A<T>>`, `A<A<A<T>>>`, etc.), an endless recursion ensues until the stack overflows.
In this PR, I have attempted to fix this behavior by implementing a two-phase checking: When checking `B`, my code first checks `A` _separately_ and stops if `A` already turns out to be infinite. If not (such as for `Option<T>`), the second phase checks whether the root type (`B`) is ever nested inside itself, e.g.:
```rust
struct Foo { x: Option<Option<Foo>> }
```
Special care needs to be taken for mutually recursive types, e.g.:
```rust
struct A<T> {
z: T,
x: B<T>,
}
struct B<T> {
y: A<T>
}
```
Here, both `A` and `B` both _are_ `SelfRecursive` and _contain_ a recursive type. The current behavior, which I have maintained, is to treat both `A` and `B` as `SelfRecursive`, and accordingly report errors for both.
