Module experiments: Add one more prelude layer for extern crate names passed with `--extern`
Implements one item from https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/the-great-module-adventure-continues/6678/183
When some name is looked up in lexical scope (`name`, i.e. not module-relative scope `some_mod::name` or `::name`), it's searched roughly in the next order:
- local variables
- items in unnamed blocks
- items in the current module
- ✨ NEW! ✨ crate names passed with `--extern` ("extern prelude")
- standard library prelude (`Vec`, `drop`)
- language prelude (built-in types like `u8`, `str`, etc)
The last two layers contain a limited set of names controlled by us and not arbitrary user-defined names like upper layers. We want to be able to add new names into these two layers without breaking user code, so "extern prelude" names have higher priority than std prelude and built-in types.
This is a one-time breaking change, that's why it would be nice to run this through crater.
Practical impact is expected to be minimal though due to stylistic reasons (there are not many `Uppercase` crates) and due to the way how primitive types are resolved (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/32131).
Warn on pointless #[derive] in more places
This fixes the regression in #49934 and ensures that unused `#[derive]` invocations on statements, expressions and generic type parameters survive to trip the `unused_attributes` lint. There is a separate warning hardcoded for `#[derive]` on macro invocations since linting (even the early-lint pass) occurs after expansion. This also adds regression tests for some nodes that were already warning properly.
closes#49934
This fixes the regression in #49934 and ensures that unused `#[derive]`s on statements, expressions and generic type parameters survive to trip the `unused_attributes` lint. For `#[derive]` on macro invocations it has a hardcoded warning since linting occurs after expansion. This also adds regression testing for some nodes that were already warning properly.
closes#49934
Added warning for unused arithmetic expressions
The compiler now displays a warning when a binary arithmetic operation is evaluated but not used. This resolves#50124 by following the instructions outlined in the issue. The changes are as follows:
- Added new pattern matching for unused arithmetic expressions in `src/librustc_lint/unused.rs`
- Added `#[must_use]` attributes to the binary operation methods in `src/libcore/internal_macros.rs`
- Added `#[must_use]` attributes to the non-assigning binary operators in `src/libcore/ops/arith.rs`
Access individual fields of tuples, closures and generators on drop.
Fixes#48623, by extending the change in #47917 to closures. Also does this for tuples and generators for consistency.
Enums are unchanged because there is now way to borrow `*enum.field` without borrowing `enum.field` at the moment, so any error would be reported when the enum goes out of scope. Unions aren't changed because unions they don't automatically drop their fields.
r? @nikomatsakis
Allow variant discriminant initializers to refer to other initializer…
…s of the same enum
r? @eddyb
fixes the 2.4 failure of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49765
cc @durka @retep998
Edition breakage lint for absolute paths starting with modules
We plan to enable `extern_absolute_paths` in the 2018 edition. To allow for that, folks must transition their paths in a previous edition to the new one. This makes paths which import module contents via `use module::` or `::module::` obsolete, and we must edition-lint these.
https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/the-great-module-adventure-continues/6678/205?u=manishearth is the current plan for paths.
r? @nikomatsakis
Fixes#48722
don't see issue #0
The unstable-feature attribute requires an issue (neglecting it is
E0547), which gets used in the error messages. Unfortunately, there are
some cases where "0" is apparently used a placeholder where no issue
exists, directing the user to see the (nonexistent) issue #0. (It would
have been better to either let `issue` be optional—compare to how issue
is an `Option<u32>` in the feature-gate declarations in
libsyntax/feature-gate.rs—or actually require that an issue be created.)
Rather than endeavoring to change how `#[unstable]` works at this time
(given competing contributor and reviewer priorities), this simple patch
proposes the less-ambitious solution of just not adding the "(see
issue)" note when the number is zero.
Resolves#49983.
