This is an alternative to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/29954 for fixing #29857 that seems to me to be more inline with the general strategy around `TyError`. It also includes the fix for #30589 -- in fact, just the minimal change of making `ty_is_local` tolerate `TyError` avoids the ICE, but you get a lot of duplicate error reports, so in the case where the impl's trait reference already includes `TyError`, we just ignore the impl altogether.
cc @arielb1 @sanxiyn
Fixes#29857.
Fixes#30589.
Downgrade unit struct match via S(..) warnings to errors
The error signalling was introduced in #29383
It was noted as a warning-cycle-less regression in #30379Fix#30379
macro future proofing rules.
(We may want to think about what this test was actually testing and
figure out a way to test it without running afoul of macro future
proofing. I spent some time trying to do this, e.g. by inserting
parenthesis in the macro input pattern, but I could not quickly get it
working, so I took this tack instead.)
It was recently realized that we accept defaulted type parameters everywhere, without feature gate, even though the only place that we really *intended* to accept them were on types. This PR adds a lint warning unless the "type-parameter-defaults" feature is enabled. This should eventually become a hard error.
This is a [breaking-change] in that new feature gates are required (or simply removing the defaults, which is probably a better choice as they have little effect at this time). Results of a [crater run][crater] suggest that approximately 5-15 crates are affected. I didn't do the measurement quite right so that run cannot distinguish "true" regressions from "non-root" regressions, but even the upper bound of 15 affected crates seems relatively minimal.
[crater]: https://gist.github.com/nikomatsakis/760c6a67698bd24253bf
cc @rust-lang/lang
r? @pnkfelix
The motivation (other than removing boilerplate) is that this is a baby step towards a parser with error recovery.
[breaking-change] if you use any of the changed functions, you'll need to remove a try! or panictry!
This is roughly the same as my previous PR that created a dependency graph, but that:
1. The dependency graph is only optionally constructed, though this doesn't seem to make much of a difference in terms of overhead (see measurements below).
2. The dependency graph is simpler (I combined a lot of nodes).
3. The dependency graph debugging facilities are much better: you can now use `RUST_DEP_GRAPH_FILTER` to filter the dep graph to just the nodes you are interested in, which is super help.
4. The tests are somewhat more elaborate, including a few known bugs I need to fix in a second pass.
This is potentially a `[breaking-change]` for plugin authors. If you are poking about in tcx state or something like that, you probably want to add `let _ignore = tcx.dep_graph.in_ignore();`, which will cause your reads/writes to be ignored and not affect the dep-graph.
After this, or perhaps as an add-on to this PR in some cases, what I would like to do is the following:
- [x] Write-up a little guide to how to use this system, the debugging options available, and what the possible failure modes are.
- [ ] Introduce read-only and perhaps the `Meta` node
- [x] Replace "memoization tasks" with node from the map itself
- [ ] Fix the shortcomings, obviously! Notably, the HIR map needs to register reads, and there is some state that is not yet tracked. (Maybe as a separate PR.)
- [x] Refactor the dep-graph code so that the actual maintenance of the dep-graph occurs in a parallel thread, and the main thread simply throws things into a shared channel (probably a fixed-size channel). There is no reason for dep-graph construction to be on the main thread. (Maybe as a separate PR.)
Regarding performance: adding this tracking does add some overhead, approximately 2% in my measurements (I was comparing the build times for rustdoc). Interestingly, enabling or disabling tracking doesn't seem to do very much. I want to poke at this some more and gather a bit more data -- in some tests I've seen that 2% go away, but on others it comes back. It's not entirely clear to me if that 2% is truly due to constructing the dep-graph at all.
The next big step after this is write some code to dump the dep-graph to disk and reload it.
r? @michaelwoerister
The current help message is too much about "normal" macros to be used
as general message. Keep it for normal macros, and add custom help and
error messages for macro definitions.
Add note when item accessed from module via `m.i` rather than `m::i`.
(I tried to make this somewhat future-proofed, in that the `UnresolvedNameContext` could be expanded in the future with other cases besides paths that are known to be modules.)
This supersedes PR #30356 ; since I'm responsible for a bunch of new code here, someone else should review it. :)
This PR is a rebase of the original PR by @eddyb https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/21836 with some unrebasable parts manually reapplied, feature gate added + type equality restriction added as described below.
This implementation is partial because the type equality restriction is applied to all type ascription expressions and not only those in lvalue contexts. Thus, all difficulties with detection of these contexts and translation of coercions having effect in runtime are avoided.
So, you can't write things with coercions like `let slice = &[1, 2, 3]: &[u8];`. It obviously makes type ascription less useful than it should be, but it's still much more useful than not having type ascription at all.
In particular, things like `let v = something.iter().collect(): Vec<_>;` and `let u = t.into(): U;` work as expected and I'm pretty happy with these improvements alone.
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/23416
Make RFC 1214 warnings into errors, and rip out the "warn or err"
associated machinery. Future such attempts should go through lints
anyhow.
There is a fair amount of fallout in the compile-fail tests, as WF
checking now occurs earlier in the process.
r? @arielb1
associated machinery. Future such attempts should go through lints
anyhow.
There is a fair amount of fallout in the compile-fail tests, as WF
checking now occurs earlier in the process.
previously the error was erased and a `non-const path` error was emitted at the location of the field access instead of at the overflow location (as can be seen in the playground: http://is.gd/EuAF5F )
