match lowering: simplify empty candidate selection
In match lowering, `match_simplified_candidates` is tasked with removing candidates that are fully matched and linking them up properly. The code that does that was needlessly complicated; this PR simplifies it.
The overall change isn't big but I split it up into tiny commits to convince myself that I was correctly preserving behavior. The test changes are all due to the first commit. Let me know if you'd prefer me to split up the PR to make reviewing easier.
r? `@matthewjasper`
match lowering: eagerly simplify match pairs
This removes one important complication from match lowering. Before this, match pair simplification (which includes collecting bindings and type ascriptions) was intertwined with the whole match lowering algorithm.
I'm avoiding this by storing in each `MatchPair` the sub-`MatchPair`s that correspond to its subfields. This makes it possible to simplify everything (except or-patterns) in `Candidate::new()`.
This should open up further simplifications. It will also give us proper control over the order of bindings.
r? `@matthewjasper`
Use intrinsics::debug_assertions in debug_assert_nounwind
This is the first item in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/120848.
Based on the benchmarking in this PR, it looks like, for the programs in our benchmark suite, enabling all these additional checks does not introduce significant compile-time overhead, with the single exception of `Alignment::new_unchecked`. Therefore, I've added `#[cfg(debug_assertions)]` to that one call site, so that it remains compiled out in the distributed standard library.
The trailing commas in the previous calls to `debug_assert_nounwind!` were causing the macro to expand to `panic_nouwnind_fmt`, which requires more work to set up its arguments, and that overhead alone is measured between this perf run and the next: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120863#issuecomment-1937423502
match lowering: simplify block creation
Match lowering was doing complicated things with block creation. As far as I can tell it was trying to avoid creating unneeded blocks, but of the three places that start out with `otherwise = &mut None`, two of them called `otherwise.unwrap_or_else(|| self.cfg.start_new_block())` anyway. As far as I can tell the only place where this PR makes a difference is in `lower_match_tree`, which did indeed sometimes avoid creating the unreachable final block + FakeRead. Unless this is important I propose we do the naive thing instead.
I have not checked all the graph isomorphisms by hand, but at a glance the test diff looks sensible.
r? `@matthewjasper`
Fold pointer operations in GVN
This PR proposes 2 combinations of cast operations in MIR GVN:
- a chain of `PtrToPtr` or `MutToConstPointer` casts can be folded together into a single `PtrToPtr` cast;
- we attempt to evaluate more ptr ops when there is no provenance.
In particular, this allows to read from static slices.
This is not yet sufficient to see through slice operations that use `PtrComponents` (because that's a union), but still a step forward.
r? `@ghost`
Print kind of coroutine closure
Make sure that we print "async closure" when we have an async closure, rather than calling it generically a ["coroutine-closure"](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120361).
Fixes#120886
r? oli-obk
match lowering: consistently lower bindings deepest-first
Currently when lowering match expressions to MIR, we do a funny little dance with the order of bindings. I attempt to explain it in the third commit: we handle refutable (i.e. needing a test) patterns differently than irrefutable ones. This leads to inconsistencies, as reported in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/120210. The reason we need a dance at all is for situations like:
```rust
fn foo1(x: NonCopyStruct) {
let y @ NonCopyStruct { copy_field: z } = x;
// the above should turn into
let z = x.copy_field;
let y = x;
}
```
Here the `y ```````@```````` binding will move out of `x`, so we need to copy the field first.
I believe that the inconsistency came about when we fixed https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69971, and didn't notice that the fix didn't extend to refutable patterns. My guess then is that ordering bindings by "deepest-first, otherwise source order" is a sound choice. This PR implements that (at least I hope, match lowering is hard to follow 🥲).
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/120210
r? ```````@oli-obk``````` since you merged the original fix to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69971
cc ```````@matthewjasper```````
Add FileCheck annotations to MIR-opt SROA tests
Part of #116971, adds FileCheck annotations to SROA MIR-opt tests in `tests/mir-opt/sroa` and a few uncategorized files.
r? cjgillot
raw pointer metadata API: data address -> data pointer
A pointer consists of [more than just an address](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3559), so let's not equate "pointer" and "address" in these docs.
Rename `pointer` field on `Pin`
A few days ago, I was helping another user create a self-referential type using `PhantomPinned`. However, I noticed an odd behavior when I tried to access one of the type's fields via `Pin`'s `Deref` impl:
```rust
use std::{marker::PhantomPinned, ptr};
struct Pinned {
data: i32,
pointer: *const i32,
_pin: PhantomPinned,
}
fn main() {
let mut b = Box::pin(Pinned {
data: 42,
pointer: ptr::null(),
_pin: PhantomPinned,
});
{
let pinned = unsafe { b.as_mut().get_unchecked_mut() };
pinned.pointer = &pinned.data;
}
println!("{}", unsafe { *b.pointer });
}
```
```rust
error[E0658]: use of unstable library feature 'unsafe_pin_internals'
--> <source>:19:30
|
19 | println!("{}", unsafe { *b.pointer });
| ^^^^^^^^^
error[E0277]: `Pinned` doesn't implement `std::fmt::Display`
--> <source>:19:20
|
19 | println!("{}", unsafe { *b.pointer });
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ `Pinned` cannot be formatted with the default formatter
|
= help: the trait `std::fmt::Display` is not implemented for `Pinned`
= note: in format strings you may be able to use `{:?}` (or {:#?} for pretty-print) instead
= note: this error originates in the macro `$crate::format_args_nl` which comes from the expansion of the macro `println` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
```
Since the user named their field `pointer`, it conflicts with the `pointer` field on `Pin`, which is public but unstable since Rust 1.60.0 with #93176. On versions from 1.33.0 to 1.59.0, where the field on `Pin` is private, this program compiles and prints `42` as expected.
To avoid this confusing behavior, this PR renames `pointer` to `__pointer`, so that it's less likely to conflict with a `pointer` field on the underlying type, as accessed through the `Deref` impl. This is technically a breaking change for anyone who names their field `__pointer` on the inner type; if this is undesirable, it could be renamed to something more longwinded. It's also a nightly breaking change for any external users of `unsafe_pin_internals`.
