Detect struct construction with private field in field with default
When trying to construct a struct that has a public field of a private type, suggest using `..` if that field has a default value.
```
error[E0603]: struct `Priv1` is private
--> $DIR/non-exhaustive-ctor-2.rs:19:39
|
LL | let _ = S { field: (), field1: m::Priv1 {} };
| ------ ^^^^^ private struct
| |
| while setting this field
|
note: the struct `Priv1` is defined here
--> $DIR/non-exhaustive-ctor-2.rs:14:4
|
LL | struct Priv1 {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
help: the type `Priv1` of field `field1` is private, but you can construct the default value defined for it in `S` using `..` in the struct initializer expression
|
LL | let _ = S { field: (), .. };
| ~~
```
Fix typo with paren rustc_llvm/build.rs
The current parenthesis looks suspect: it means that OpenHarmony is always excluded whereas it looks like it was intended to only be excluded if the architecture was Arm.
Since Rust doesn't support the other architectures with OpenHarmony, there currently isn't a bug but this cleans up some suspicious code and avoids a potential future annoyance for someone trying to bring up a new triple.
r? `@Amanieu`
Use `eq_ignore_ascii_case` to avoid heap alloc in `detect_confuse_type`
A small optimization has been made, using `to_ascii_lowercase()` instead of `to_lowercase().to_string()`.
r? compiler
Replace unsafe `security_attributes` function with safe `inherit_handle` alternative
The `security_attributes` function is marked as safe despite taking a raw pointer which will later be used. Fortunately this function is only used internally and only in one place that has been basically the same for a decade now. However, we only ever set one bool so it's easy enough to replace with something that's actually safe.
In the future we might want to expose the ability for users to set security attributes. But that should be properly designed (and safe!).
Add regression test for `saturating_sub` bounds check issue
Add codegen test for issue where `valid_index.saturating_sub(X)` produced an extra bounds check.
This was fixed by the LLVM upgrade.
Closesrust-lang/rust#139759
Rehome 32 `tests/ui/issues/` tests to other subdirectories under `tests/ui/`
rust-lang/rust#143902 divided into smaller, easier to review chunks.
Part of rust-lang/rust#133895
Methodology:
1. Refer to the previously written `tests/ui/SUMMARY.md`
2. Find an appropriate category for the test, using the original issue thread and the test contents.
3. Add the issue URL at the bottom (not at the top, as that would mess up stderr line numbers)
4. Rename the tests to make their purpose clearer
Inspired by the methodology that `@Kivooeo` was using.
r? `@jieyouxu`
When trying to construct a struct that has a public field of a private type, suggest using `..` if that field has a default value.
```
error[E0603]: struct `Priv1` is private
--> $DIR/non-exhaustive-ctor.rs:25:39
|
LL | let _ = S { field: (), field1: m::Priv1 {} };
| ------ ^^^^^ private struct
| |
| while setting this field
|
note: the struct `Priv1` is defined here
--> $DIR/non-exhaustive-ctor.rs:14:4
|
LL | struct Priv1 {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
help: the field `field1` you're trying to set has a default value, you can use `..` to use it
|
LL | let _ = S { field: (), .. };
| ~~
```
Start reporting future breakage for `ILL_FORMED_ATTRIBUTE_INPUT` in dependencies
This has been a warn lint since early 2019 and a deny-by-default lint since late 2019.
We're currently transitioning some of the cases where this lint is being produced to a hard error (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143607https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143808 and more)
So let's report this lint in all dependencies for the remaining attributes
r? `@traviscross`
`@rustbot` labels +I-lang-nominated +T-lang -T-compiler
cc `@jdonszelmann`
(Separate question: Why does the "Future incompatibility report" only trigger if `report_in_deps` is true, even if the future incompatibility happens in the same crate, is this correct?)
This also needs a crater run, but I don't have permissions to trigger this
`suggest_borrow_generic_arg`: use the correct generic args
The suggestion now gets calls' generic arguments from the callee's type to handle cases where the callee isn't an identifier expression. Fixesrust-lang/rust#145164.
Fix an unstable feature comment that wasn't a doc comment
Every other feature in the list uses a doc comment; fix one that used a regular comment to use a doc comment.
`{BTree,Hash}Map`: add "`Entry` API" section heading
I wanted to link to an introduction of the `Entry` API to the help message of `clippy::map_entry` (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/11598 for motivation), but I found the documentation on the `Entry` enum itself a bit short. On the other hand, `{BTree,Hash}Map` both have sections in their docs introducing the whole API and giving usage examples, and so I would like to link to that instead. For that, I introduce the "`Entry` API" section heading to both of them.
Do let me know whether you think this is the right approach.
