Fix 2021 `dyn` suggestion that used code as label
The arguments to `span_suggestion` were in the wrong order, so the error
looked like this:
error[E0783]: trait objects without an explicit `dyn` are deprecated
--> src/test/ui/editions/dyn-trait-sugg-2021.rs:10:5
|
10 | Foo::hi(123);
| ^^^ help: <dyn Foo>: `use `dyn``
Now the error looks like this, as expected:
error[E0783]: trait objects without an explicit `dyn` are deprecated
--> src/test/ui/editions/dyn-trait-sugg-2021.rs:10:5
|
10 | Foo::hi(123);
| ^^^ help: use `dyn`: `<dyn Foo>`
This issue was only present in the 2021 error; the 2018 lint was
correct.
r? `@m-ou-se`
The arguments to `span_suggestion` were in the wrong order, so the error
looked like this:
error[E0783]: trait objects without an explicit `dyn` are deprecated
--> src/test/ui/editions/dyn-trait-sugg-2021.rs:10:5
|
10 | Foo::hi(123);
| ^^^ help: <dyn Foo>: `use `dyn``
Now the error looks like this, as expected:
error[E0783]: trait objects without an explicit `dyn` are deprecated
--> src/test/ui/editions/dyn-trait-sugg-2021.rs:10:5
|
10 | Foo::hi(123);
| ^^^ help: use `dyn`: `<dyn Foo>`
This issue was only present in the 2021 error; the 2018 lint was
correct.
Detect bare blocks with type ascription that were meant to be a `struct` literal
Address part of #34255.
Potential improvement: silence the other knock down errors in `issue-34255-1.rs`.
Add regression test for a spurious import
This PR adds a test that verifies that the bug described in the linked issue does not creep back into the code. In essence it checks that compiling some specific code (that uses 128 bit multiplication) with a specific set of compiler options does not lead to a spurious import of a panic function.
I noticed that other wasm tests use `# only-wasm32-bare` in their `Makefile`. This will skip the test for me. I did not find out how to run this test locally. Maybe someone can help.
closes#78744
r? `@jyn514`
Fix drop handling for `if let` expressions
MIR lowering for `if let` expressions is now more complicated now that
`if let` exists in HIR. This PR adds a scope for the variables bound in
an `if let` expression and then uses an approach similar to how we
handle loops to ensure that we reliably drop the correct variables.
Closes#88307
cc `@flip1995` `@richkadel` `@c410-f3r`
expand: Treat more macro calls as statement macro calls
This PR implements the suggestion from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87981#issuecomment-906641052 and treats fn-like macro calls inside `StmtKind::Item` and `StmtKind::Semi` as statement macro calls, which is consistent with treatment of attribute invocations in the same positions and with token-based macro expansion model in general.
This also allows to remove a special case in `NodeId` assignment (previously tried in #87779), and to use statement `NodeId`s for linting (`assign_id!`).
r? `@Aaron1011`
Point at unclosed delimiters as part of the primary MultiSpan
Both the place where the parser encounters a needed closed delimiter and
the unclosed opening delimiter are important, so they should get the
same level of highlighting in the output.
_Context: https://twitter.com/mwk4/status/1430631546432675840_
Path remapping: Make behavior of diagnostics output dependent on presence of --remap-path-prefix.
This PR fixes a regression (#87745) with `--remap-path-prefix` where the flag stopped causing diagnostic messages to be remapped as well. The regression was introduced in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83813 where we erroneously assumed that remapping of diagnostic messages was not desired anymore (because #70642 partially undid that functionality with nobody objecting).
The issue is fixed by making `--remap-path-prefix` remap diagnostic messages again, including for paths that have been remapped in upstream crates (e.g. the standard library). This means that "sysroot-localization" (implemented in #70642) is also disabled if `rustc` is invoked with `--remap-path-prefix`. The assumption is that once someone starts explicitly remapping paths they also don't want paths to their local Rust installation in their build output.
In the future we might want to give more fine-grained control over this behavior via compiler flags (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3127 for a related RFC). For now this PR is intended as a regression fix.
This PR is an alternative to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/88191, which makes diagnostic messages be remapped unconditionally. That approach, however, would effectively revert #70642.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87745.
cc `@cbeuw`
r? `@ghost`
Preserve most sub-obligations in the projection cache
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85360
When we evaluate a projection predicate, we may produce sub-obligations. During trait evaluation, evaluating these sub-obligations might cause us to produce `EvaluatedToOkModuloRegions`.
When we cache the result of projection in our projection cache, we try to throw away some of the sub-obligations, so that we don't need to re-evaluate/process them the next time we need to perform this particular projection. However, we may end up throwing away predicates that will (recursively) evaluate to `EvaluatedToOkModuloRegions`. If we do, then the result of evaluating a predicate will depend on the state of the predicate cache - this is global untracked state, which interacts badly with incremental compilation.
To fix this, we now only discard global predicates that evaluate to `EvaluatedToOk`. This ensures that any predicates that (may) evaluate to `EvaluatedToOkModuloRegions` are kept in the cache, and influence the results of any queries which perform this projection.
rustdoc: Don't panic on ambiguous inherent associated types
Instead, return `Type::Infer` since compilation should fail anyway.
That's how rustdoc handles `hir::TyKind::Err`s, so this just extends
that behavior to `ty::Err`s when analyzing associated types.
For some reason, the error is printed twice with rustdoc (though only
once with rustc). I'm not sure why that is, but it's better than
panicking.
This commit also makes rustdoc fail early in the non-projection,
non-error case, instead of returning a `Res::Err` that would likely
cause rustdoc to panic later on. This change is originally from #88379.
r? `@GuillaumeGomez`
MIR lowering for `if let` expressions is now more complicated now that
`if let` exists in HIR. This PR adds a scope for the variables bound in
an `if let` expression and then uses an approach similar to how we
handle loops to ensure that we reliably drop the correct variables.
Instead, return `Type::Infer` since compilation should fail anyway.
That's how rustdoc handles `hir::TyKind::Err`s, so this just extends
that behavior to `ty::Err`s when analyzing associated types.
For some reason, the error is printed twice with rustdoc (though only
once with rustc). I'm not sure why that is, but it's better than
panicking.
This commit also makes rustdoc fail early in the non-projection,
non-error case, instead of returning a `Res::Err` that would likely
cause rustdoc to panic later on. This change is originally from #88379.
Display associated types of implementors
Fixes#86631.
Contrary to before, it doesn't display methods. I also had to "resurrect" the `auto-hide-trait-implementations` setting. :3
Only question at this point: should I move the `render_impl` boolean arguments into one struct? We're starting to have quite a lot of them...
cc `@cynecx`
r? `@camelid`
Emit specific warning to clarify that `#[no_mangle]` should not be applied on foreign statics or functions
Foreign statics and foreign functions should not have `#[no_mangle]` applied, as it does nothing to the name and has some extra hidden behavior that is normally unwanted. There was an existing warning for this, but it says the attribute is only allowed on "statics or functions", which to the user can be confusing.
This PR adds a specific version of the unused `#[no_mangle]` warning that explains that the target is a *foreign* static or function and that they do not need the attribute.
Fixes#78989
Introduce `let...else`
Tracking issue: #87335
The trickiest part for me was enforcing the diverging else block with clear diagnostics. Perhaps the obvious solution is to expand to `let _: ! = ..`, but I decided against this because, when a "mismatched type" error is found in typeck, there is no way to trace where in the HIR the expected type originated, AFAICT. In order to pass down this information, I believe we should introduce `Expectation::LetElseNever(HirId)` or maybe add `HirId` to `Expectation::HasType`, but I left that as a future enhancement. For now, I simply assert that the block is `!` with a custom `ObligationCauseCode`, and I think this is clear enough, at least to start. The downside here is that the error points at the entire block rather than the specific expression with the wrong type. I left a todo to this effect.
Overall, I believe this PR is feature-complete with regard to the RFC.
