Support parentheses in patterns under feature gate
This is a prerequisite for any other extensions to pattern syntax - `|` with multiple patterns, type ascription, `..PAT` in slice patterns.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/554
Allow for instantiating statics from upstream crates
This PR makes the infrastructure around translating statics a bit more flexible so that it can also instantiate statics from upstream crates if the need arises. This is preparatory work for a MIR-only RLIBs prototype, where the instantiation of a `static` may be deferred until a leaf crate.
r? @eddyb (feel free to assign to someone else if you're busy)
Fix span of visibility
This PR
1. adds a closing parenthesis to the span of `Visibility::Crate` (e.g. `pub(crate)`). The current span only covers `pub(crate`.
2. adds a `span` field to `Visibility::Restricted`. This span covers the entire visibility expression (e.g. `pub (in self)`). Currently all we can have is a span for `Path`.
This PR is motivated by the bug found in rustfmt (https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/rustfmt/issues/2398).
The first change is a strict improvement IMHO. The second change may not be desirable, as it adds a field which is currently not used by the compiler.
A new section is added to both both struct and trait doc pages.
On struct/enum pages, a new 'Auto Trait Implementations' section displays any
synthetic implementations for auto traits. Currently, this is only done
for Send and Sync.
On trait pages, a new 'Auto Implementors' section displays all types
which automatically implement the trait. Effectively, this is a list of
all public types in the standard library.
Synthesized impls for a particular auto trait ('synthetic impls') take
into account generic bounds. For example, a type 'struct Foo<T>(T)' will
have 'impl<T> Send for Foo<T> where T: Send' generated for it.
Manual implementations of auto traits are also taken into account. If we have
the following types:
'struct Foo<T>(T)'
'struct Wrapper<T>(Foo<T>)'
'unsafe impl<T> Send for Wrapper<T>' // pretend that Wrapper<T> makes
this sound somehow
Then Wrapper will have the following impl generated:
'impl<T> Send for Wrapper<T>'
reflecting the fact that 'T: Send' need not hold for 'Wrapper<T>: Send'
to hold
Lifetimes, HRTBS, and projections (e.g. '<T as Iterator>::Item') are
taken into account by synthetic impls
However, if a type can *never* implement a particular auto trait
(e.g. 'struct MyStruct<T>(*const T)'), then a negative impl will be
generated (in this case, 'impl<T> !Send for MyStruct<T>')
All of this means that a user should be able to copy-paste a synthetic
impl into their code, without any observable changes in behavior
(assuming the rest of the program remains unchanged).
For E0277 on `for` loops, point at the "head" expression
When E0277's span points at a `for` loop, the actual issue is in the
element being iterated. Instead of pointing at the entire loop, point
only at the first line (when possible) so that the span ends in the
element for which E0277 was triggered.
Immovable generators
This adds support for immovable generators which allow you to borrow local values inside generator across suspension points. These are declared using a `static` keyword:
```rust
let mut generator = static || {
let local = &Vec::new();
yield;
local.push(0i8);
};
generator.resume();
// ERROR moving the generator after it has resumed would invalidate the interior reference
// drop(generator);
```
Region inference is no longer affected by the types stored in generators so the regions inside should be similar to other code (and unaffected by the presence of `yield` expressions). The borrow checker is extended to pick up the slack so interior references still result in errors for movable generators. This fixes#44197, #45259 and #45093.
This PR depends on [PR #44917 (immovable types)](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/44917), I suggest potential reviewers ignore the first commit as it adds immovable types.
Implement RFC 1946 - intra-rustdoc links
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1946https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/43466
Note for reviewers: The plain line counts are a little inflated because of how the markdown link parsing was done. [Read the file diff with "whitespace only" changes removed](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/47046/files?w=1) to get a better view of what actually changed there.
This pulls the name/path resolution mechanisms out of the compiler and runs it on the markdown in a crate's docs, so that links can be made to `SomeStruct` directly rather than finding the folder path to `struct.SomeStruct.html`. Check the `src/test/rustdoc/intra-paths.rs` test in this PR for a demo. The change was... a little invasive, but unlocks a really powerful mechanism for writing documentation that doesn't care about where an item was written to on the hard disk.
Items included:
- [x] Make work with the hoedown renderer
- [x] Handle relative paths
- [x] Parse out the "path ambiguities" qualifiers (`[crate foo]`, `[struct Foo]`, `[foo()]`, `[static FOO]`, `[foo!]`, etc)
- [x] Resolve foreign macros
- [x] Resolve local macros
- [x] Handle the use of inner/outer attributes giving different resolution scopes (handling for non-modules pushed to different PR)
Items not included:
- [ ] Make sure cross-crate inlining works (blocked on refactor described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/47046#issuecomment-354824520)
- [ ] Implied Shortcut Reference Links (where just doing `[::std::iter::Iterator][]` without a reference anchor will resolve using the reference name rather than the link target) (requires modifying the markdown parser - blocked on Hoedown/Pulldown switch and https://github.com/google/pulldown-cmark/issues/121)
- [ ] Handle enum variants and UFCS methods (Enum variants link to the enum page, associated methods don't link at all)
- [ ] Emit more warnings/errors when things fail to resolve (linking to a value-namespaced item without a qualifier will emit an error, otherwise the link is just treated as a url, not a rust path)
- [ ] Give better spans for resolution errors (currently the span for the first doc comment is used)
- [ ] Check for inner doc comments on things that aren't modules
I'm making the PR, but it should be noted that most of the work was done by Misdreavus 😄
(Editor's note: This has become a lie, check that commit log, Manish did a ton of work after this PR was opened `>_>`)
Implement repr(transparent)
r? @eddyb for the functional changes. The bulk of the PR is error messages and docs, might be good to have a doc person look over those.
cc #43036
cc @nox
Properly parse impls for the never type `!`
Recover from missing `for` in `impl Trait for Type`
Prohibit inherent default impls and default impls of auto traits
Change wording in more diagnostics to use "auto traits"
Some minor code cleanups in the parser
rustc: Tweak `#[target_feature]` syntax
This is an implementation of the `#[target_feature]` syntax-related changes of
[RFC 2045][rfc]. Notably two changes have been implemented:
* The new syntax is `#[target_feature(enable = "..")]` instead of
`#[target_feature = "+.."]`. The `enable` key is necessary instead of the `+`
to indicate that a feature is being enabled, and a sub-list is used for
possible expansion in the future. Additionally within this syntax the feature
names being enabled are now whitelisted against a known set of target feature
names that we know about.
* The `#[target_feature]` attribute can only be applied to unsafe functions. It
was decided in the RFC that invoking an instruction possibly not defined for
the current processor is undefined behavior, so to enable this feature for now
it requires an `unsafe` intervention.
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2045-target-feature.md
No longer parse it.
Remove AutoTrait variant from AST and HIR.
Remove backwards compatibility lint.
Remove coherence checks, they make no sense for the new syntax.
Remove from rustdoc.
Use DefIndex encoding that works better with on-disk variable length integer representations.
Use the least instead of the most significant bit for representing the address space.
r? @eddyb
