Move the JSON error emitter to librustc_errors
This is done both as a cleanup (it makes little sense for this emitter to be in libsyntax), but also as part of broader work to decouple Session from librustc itself.
Along the way, this also moves SourceMap to syntax_pos, which is also nice for the above reasons, as well as allowing dropping the SourceMapper trait from code. This had the unfortunate side-effect of moving `FatalError` to rustc_data_structures (it's needed in syntax_pos, due to SourceMap, but putting it there feels somehow worse).
SourceMap is now in the root of all rustc-specific crates, syntax_pos,
so there's no need for the trait object to decouple the dependencies
between librustc_errors and libsyntax as was needed previously.
Push `ast::{ItemKind, ImplItemKind}::OpaqueTy` hack down into lowering
We currently have a hack in the form of `ast::{ItemKind, ImplItemKind}::OpaqueTy` which is constructed literally when you write `type Alias = impl Trait;` but not e.g. `type Alias = Vec<impl Trait>;`. Per https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2515, this needs to change to allow `impl Trait` in nested positions. This PR achieves this change for the syntactic aspect but not the semantic one, which will require changes in lowering and def collection. In the interim, `TyKind::opaque_top_hack` is introduced to avoid knock-on changes in lowering, collection, and resolve. These hacks can then be removed and fixed one by one until the desired semantics are supported.
r? @varkor
This does not update the use sites or delete the now unnecessary
SourceMapper trait, to allow git to interpret the file move as a rename
rather than a new file.
support issue = "none" in unstable attributes
This works towards fixing #41260.
This PR allows the use of `issue = "none"` in unstable attributes and makes changes to internally store the issue number as an `Option<NonZeroU32>`. For example:
```rust
#[unstable(feature = "unstable_test_feature", issue = "none")]
fn unstable_issue_none() {}
```
It was not made optional because feedback seen here #60860 suggested that people might forget the issue field if it was optional.
I could not remove the current uses of `issue = "0"` (of which there are a lot) because the stage 0 compiler expects the old syntax. Once this is available in the stage 0 compiler we can replace all uses of `"0"` with `"none"` and no longer allow `"0"`. This is my first time contributing, so I'm not sure what the protocol is with two-part things like this, so some guidance would be appreciated.
r? @varkor
Merge repeated definitions
Step forward on #66149
I may need further context to understand the need for a separate crate.
Also, please tell me if you think of other definitions to merge.
Support registering inert attributes and attribute tools using crate-level attributes
And remove `#[feature(custom_attribute)]`.
(`rustc_plugin::Registry::register_attribute` is not removed yet, I'll do it in a follow up PR.)
```rust
#![register_attr(my_attr)]
#![register_tool(my_tool)]
#[my_attr] // OK
#[my_tool::anything] // OK
fn main() {}
```
---
Some tools (`rustfmt` and `clippy`) used in tool attributes are hardcoded in the compiler.
We need some way to introduce them without hardcoding as well.
This PR introduces a way to do it with a crate level attribute.
The previous attempt to introduce them through command line (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/57921) met some resistance.
This probably needs to go through an RFC before stabilization.
However, I'd prefer to land *this* PR without an RFC to able to remove `#[feature(custom_attribute)]` and `Registry::register_attribute` while also providing a replacement.
---
`register_attr` is a direct replacement for `#![feature(custom_attribute)]` (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29642), except it doesn't rely on implicit fallback from unresolved attributes to custom attributes (which was always hacky and is the primary reason for the removal of `custom_attribute`) and requires registering the attribute explicitly.
It's not clear whether it should go through stabilization or not.
It's quite possible that all the uses should migrate to `#![register_tool]` (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/66079) instead.
---
Details:
- The naming is `register_attr`/`register_tool` rather than some `register_attributes` (plural, no abbreviation) for consistency with already existing attributes like `cfg_attr`, or `feature`, etc.
---
Previous attempt: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/57921
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44690
Tracking issues: #66079 (`register_tool`), #66080 (`register_attr`)
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29642
Split libsyntax apart
In this PR the general idea is to separate the AST, parser, and friends by a more data / logic structure (tho not fully realized!) by separating out the parser and macro expansion code from libsyntax. Specifically have now three crates instead of one (libsyntax):
- libsyntax:
- concrete syntax tree (`syntax::ast`)
- definition of tokens and token-streams (`syntax::{token, tokenstream}`) -- used by `syntax::ast`
- visitors (`syntax::visit`, `syntax::mut_visit`)
- shared definitions between `libsyntax_expand`
- feature gating (`syntax::feature_gate`) -- we could possibly move this out to its own crater later.
- attribute and meta item utilities, including used-marking (`syntax::attr`)
- pretty printer (`syntax::print`) -- this should possibly be moved out later. For now I've reduced down the dependencies to a single essential one which could be broken via `ParseSess`. This entails that e.g. `Debug` impls for `Path` cannot reference the pretty printer.
- definition of `ParseSess` (`syntax::sess`) -- this is used by `syntax::{attr, print, feature_gate}` and is a common definition used by the parser and other things like librustc.
- the `syntax::source_map` -- this includes definitions used by `syntax::ast` and other things but could ostensibly be moved `syntax_pos` since that is more related to this module.
- a smattering of misc utilities not sufficiently important to itemize -- some of these could be moved to where they are used (often a single place) but I wanted to limit the scope of this PR.
- librustc_parse:
- parser (`rustc_parse::parser`) -- reading a file and such are defined in the crate root tho.
- lexer (`rustc_parse::lexer`)
- validation of meta grammar (post-expansion) in (`rustc_parse::validate_attr`)
- libsyntax_expand -- this defines the infra for macro expansion and conditional compilation but this is not libsyntax_ext; we might want to merge them later but currently libsyntax_expand is depended on by librustc_metadata which libsyntax_ext is not.
- conditional compilation (`syntax_expand::config`) -- moved from `syntax::config` to here
- the bulk of this crate is made up of the old `syntax::ext`
r? @estebank
`MethodSig` -> `FnSig` & Use it in `ItemKind::Fn`
In both AST & HIR, rename `MethodSig` to `FnSig` and then proceed to use it in `ItemKind::Fn` so that the overall structure is more regular.
r? @davidtwco
A scheme for more macro-matcher friendly pre-expansion gating
Pre-expansion gating will now avoid gating macro matchers that did not result in `Success(...)`. That is, the following is now OK despite `box 42` being a valid `expr` and that form being pre-expansion gated:
```rust
macro_rules! m {
($e:expr) => { 0 }; // This fails on the input below due to `, foo`.
(box $e:expr, foo) => { 1 }; // Successful matcher, we should get `2`.
}
fn main() {
assert_eq!(1, m!(box 42, foo));
}
```
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65846.
r? @petrochenkov
cc @Mark-Simulacrum
syntax: ABI-oblivious grammar
This PR has the following effects:
1. `extern $lit` is now legal where `$lit:literal` and `$lit` is substituted for a string literal.
2. `extern "abi_that_does_not_exist"` is now *syntactically* legal whereas before, the set of ABI strings was hard-coded into the grammar of the language. With this PR, the set of ABIs are instead validated and translated during lowering. That seems more appropriate.
3. `ast::FloatTy` is now distinct from `rustc_target::abi::FloatTy`. The former is used substantially more and the translation between them is only necessary in a single place.
4. As a result of 2-3, libsyntax no longer depends on librustc_target, which should improve pipe-lining somewhat.
cc @rust-lang/lang -- the points 1-2 slightly change the definition of the language but in a way which seems consistent with our general principles (in particular wrt. the discussions of turning things into semantic errors). I expect this to be uncontroversial but it's worth letting y'all know. :)
r? @varkor
We also sever syntax's dependency on rustc_target as a result.
This should slightly improve pipe-lining.
Moreover, some cleanup is done in related code.
