Implement `PointerLike` for `isize`, `NonNull`, `Cell`, `UnsafeCell`, and `SyncUnsafeCell`.
* Implementing `PointerLike` for `UnsafeCell` enables the possibility of interior mutable `dyn*` values. Since this means potentially exercising new codegen behavior, I added a test for it in `tests/ui/dyn-star/cell.rs`. Please let me know if there are further sorts of tests that should be written, or other care that should be taken with this change.
It is unfortunately not possible without compiler changes to implement `PointerLike` for `Atomic*` types, since they are not `repr(transparent)` (and, in theory if not in practice, `AtomicUsize`'s alignment may be greater than that of an ordinary pointer or `usize`).
* Implementing `PointerLike` for `NonNull` is useful for pointer types which wrap `NonNull`.
* Implementing `PointerLike` for `isize` is just for completeness; I have no use cases in mind, but I cannot think of any reason not to do this.
* Tracking issue: #102425
`@rustbot` label +F-dyn_star
(there is no label or tracking issue for F-pointer_like_trait)
Implementing `PointerLike` for `UnsafeCell` enables the possibility of
interior mutable `dyn*` values. Since this means potentially exercising
new codegen behavior, I added a test for it in `tests/ui/dyn-star/cell.rs`.
Also updated UI tests to account for the `isize` implementation changing
error messages.
Flatten effects directory now that it doesn't really test anything specific
These are just const trait tests now, after all.
There was one naming conflict between the aux-build `tests/ui/traits/const-traits/effects/auxiliary/cross-crate.rs` and `tests/ui/traits/const-traits/auxiliary/cross-crate.rs`. The former didn't really test anything useful since we no longer have an effect param, so I removed the test that owned it: `tests/ui/traits/const-traits/effects/no-explicit-const-params-cross-crate.rs`.
r? project-const-traits
coroutine_clone: add comments
I was very surprised to learn that coroutines can be cloned. This has non-trivial semantic consequences that I do not think have been considered. Lucky enough, it's still unstable. Let's add some comments and pointers so we hopefully become aware when a MIR opt actually is in conflict with this.
Cc `@rust-lang/wg-mir-opt`
Explain why a type is not eligible for `impl PointerLike`.
The rules were baffling when I ran in to them trying to add some impls (to `std`, not my own code, as it happens), so I made the compiler explain them to me.
The logic of the successful cases is unchanged, but I did rearrange it to reverse the order of the primitive and `Adt` cases; this makes producing the errors easier. I'm still not very familiar with `rustc` internals, so let me know if there's a better way to do any of this.
This also adds test coverage for which impls are accepted or rejected, which I didn't see any of already.
The PR template tells me I should consider mentioning a tracking issue, but there isn't one for `pointer_like_trait`, so I'll mention `dyn_star`: #102425
Use E0665 for missing `#[default]` on enum and update doc
The docs for E0665 when doing `#[derive(Default]` on an `enum` previously didn't mention `#[default]` at all, or made a distinction between unit variants, that can be annotated, and tuple or struct variants, which cannot.
E0665 was not being emitted, we now use it for the same error it belonged to before.
```
error[E0665]: `#[derive(Default)]` on enum with no `#[default]`
--> $DIR/macros-nonfatal-errors.rs:42:10
|
LL | #[derive(Default)]
| ^^^^^^^
LL | / enum NoDeclaredDefault {
LL | | Foo,
LL | | Bar,
LL | | }
| |_- this enum needs a unit variant marked with `#[default]`
|
= note: this error originates in the derive macro `Default` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
help: make this unit variant default by placing `#[default]` on it
|
LL | #[default] Foo,
| ++++++++++
help: make this unit variant default by placing `#[default]` on it
|
LL | #[default] Bar,
| ++++++++++
```
Use orphaned error code for the same error it belonged to before.
```
error[E0665]: `#[derive(Default)]` on enum with no `#[default]`
--> $DIR/macros-nonfatal-errors.rs:42:10
|
LL | #[derive(Default)]
| ^^^^^^^
LL | / enum NoDeclaredDefault {
LL | | Foo,
LL | | Bar,
LL | | }
| |_- this enum needs a unit variant marked with `#[default]`
|
= note: this error originates in the derive macro `Default` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
help: make this unit variant default by placing `#[default]` on it
|
LL | #[default] Foo,
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
help: make this unit variant default by placing `#[default]` on it
|
LL | #[default] Bar,
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
```
Detect missing `.` in method chain in `let` bindings and statements
On parse errors where an ident is found where one wasn't expected, see if the next elements might have been meant as method call or field access.
```
error: expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator, found `map`
--> $DIR/missing-dot-on-statement-expression.rs:7:29
|
LL | let _ = [1, 2, 3].iter()map(|x| x);
| ^^^ expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator
|
help: you might have meant to write a method call
|
LL | let _ = [1, 2, 3].iter().map(|x| x);
| +
```
The rules were baffling when I ran in to them trying to add some impls,
so I made the compiler explain them to me.
The logic of the successful cases is unchanged, but I did rearrange it
to reverse the order of the primitive and `Adt` cases; this makes
producing the errors easier.
On parse errors where an ident is found where one wasn't expected, see if the next elements might have been meant as method call or field access.
```
error: expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator, found `map`
--> $DIR/missing-dot-on-statement-expression.rs:7:29
|
LL | let _ = [1, 2, 3].iter()map(|x| x);
| ^^^ expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator
|
help: you might have meant to write a method call
|
LL | let _ = [1, 2, 3].iter().map(|x| x);
| +
```
Also lint on option of function pointer comparisons
This PR is the first part of #134536, ie. the linting on `Option<{fn ptr}>` in the `unpredictable_function_pointer_comparisons` lint, which isn't part of the lang nomination that the second part is going trough, and so should be able to be approved independently.
Related to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134527
r? `@compiler-errors`
Restrict `#[non_exaustive]` on structs with default field values
Do not allow users to apply `#[non_exaustive]` to a struct when they have also used default field values.
Arbitrary self types v2: no deshadow pre feature.
The arbitrary self types v2 work introduces a check for shadowed methods, whereby a method in some "outer" smart pointer type may called in preference to a method in the inner referent. This is bad if the outer pointer adds a method later, as it may change behavior, so we ensure we error in this circumstance.
It was intended that this new shadowing detection system only comes into play for users who enable the `arbitrary_self_types` feature (or of course everyone later if it's stabilized). It was believed that the new deshadowing code couldn't be reached without building the custom smart pointers that `arbitrary_self_types` enables, and therefore there was no risk of this code impacting existing users.
However, it turns out that cunning use of `Pin::get_ref` can cause this type of shadowing error to be emitted now. This commit adds a test for this case.
As we want this test to pass without arbitrary_self_types, but fail with it, I've split it into two files (one with run-pass and one without). If there's a better way I can amend it.
Part of #44874
r? ```@wesleywiser```
Arbitrary self types v2: niche deshadowing test
Arbitrary self types v2 attempts to detect cases where methods in an "outer" type (e.g. a smart pointer) might "shadow" methods in the referent.
There are a couple of cases where the current code makes no attempt to detect such shadowing. Both of these cases only apply if other unstable features are enabled.
Add a test, mostly for illustrative purposes, so we can see the shadowing cases that can occur.
Part of #44874
r? ```@wesleywiser```
unimplement `PointerLike` for trait objects
Values of type `dyn* PointerLike` or `dyn PointerLike` are not pointer-like so these types should not implement `PointerLike`.
After https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133226, `PointerLike` allows user implementations, so we can't just mark it with `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl(implement_via_object = false)]`. Instead, this PR splits the `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl(implement_via_object = ...)]` attribute into two separate attributes `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl]` and `#[rustc_do_not_implement_via_object]` so that we opt out of the automatic `impl PointerLike for dyn PointerLike` and still allow user implementations.
For traits that are marked with `#[do_not_implement_via_object]` but not `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl]` I've also made it possible to add a manual `impl Trait for dyn Trait`. There is no immediate need for this, but it was one line to implement and seems nice to have.
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134545
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/134543
r? `@compiler-errors`
This commit splits the `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl(implement_via_object = ...)]` attribute
into two attributes `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl]` and `#[rustc_do_not_implement_via_object]`.
This allows us to have special traits that can have user-defined impls but do not have the
automatic trait impl for trait objects (`impl Trait for dyn Trait`).
Fix logical error with what text is considered whitespace.
There appears to be a logical issue around what counts as leading white-space. There is code which does a subtraction assuming that no errors will be reported inside the leading whitespace. However we compute the length of that whitespace with std::char::is_whitespace and not rustc_lexer::is_whitespace. The former will include a no-break space while later will excluded it. We can only safely make the assumption that no errors will be reported in whitespace if it is all "Rust Standard" whitespace. Indeed an error does occur in unicode whitespace if it contains a no-break space. In that case the subtraction will cause a ICE (for a compiler in debug mode) as described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132918.
The arbitrary self types v2 work introduces a check for shadowed
methods, whereby a method in some "outer" smart pointer type may called
in preference to a method in the inner referent. This is bad if the
outer pointer adds a method later, as it may change behavior, so we
ensure we error in this circumstance.
It was intended that this new shadowing detection system only comes into
play for users who enable the `arbitrary_self_types` feature (or of
course everyone later if it's stabilized). It was believed that the
new deshadowing code couldn't be reached without building the custom
smart pointers that `arbitrary_self_types` enables, and therefore there
was no risk of this code impacting existing users.
However, it turns out that cunning use of `Pin::get_ref` can cause
this type of shadowing error to be emitted now. This commit adds a test
for this case.
Remove a duplicated check that doesn't do anything anymore.
fixes#134005
This code didn't actually `lub` the type of the previous expressions, but just the current type over and over again. Changing it to using the actual expression type does not change anything either, so may as well remove the entire loop.
Arbitrary self types v2 attempts to detect cases where methods in an
"outer" type (e.g. a smart pointer) might "shadow" methods in the
referent.
There are a couple of cases where the current code makes no attempt to
detect such shadowing. Both of these cases only apply if other unstable
features are enabled.
Add a test, mostly for illustrative purposes, so we can see the
shadowing cases that can occur.
Forbid overwriting types in typeck
While trying to figure out some type setting logic in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/134248 I realized that we sometimes set a type twice. While hopefully that would have been the same type, we didn't ensure that at all and just silently accepted it. So now we reject setting it twice, unless errors are happening, then we don't care.
Best reviewed commit by commit.
No behaviour change is intended.
cleanup region handling: add `LateParamRegionKind`
The second commit is to enable a split between `BoundRegionKind` and `LateParamRegionKind`, by avoiding `BoundRegionKind` where it isn't necessary.
The third comment then adds `LateParamRegionKind` to avoid having the same late-param region for separate bound regions. This fixes#124021.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Point at lint name instead of whole attr for gated lints
```
warning: unknown lint: `test_unstable_lint`
--> $DIR/warn-unknown-unstable-lint-inline.rs:4:10
|
LL | #![allow(test_unstable_lint, another_unstable_lint)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: the `test_unstable_lint` lint is unstable
= help: add `#![feature(test_unstable_lint)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
note: the lint level is defined here
--> $DIR/warn-unknown-unstable-lint-inline.rs:3:9
|
LL | #![warn(unknown_lints)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
warning: unknown lint: `test_unstable_lint`
--> $DIR/warn-unknown-unstable-lint-inline.rs:4:29
|
LL | #![allow(test_unstable_lint, another_unstable_lint)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: the `another_unstable_lint` lint is unstable
= help: add `#![feature(another_unstable_lint)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
```
This is particularly relevant when there are multiple lints in the same `warn` attribute. Pointing at the smaller span makes it clearer which one the warning is complaining about.
Advent of `tests/ui` (misc cleanups and improvements) [3/N]
Part of #133895.
Misc improvements to some ui tests immediately under `tests/ui/`.
Best reviewed commit-by-commit. Each commit's commit message contains further elaboration and rationale for changes.
r? compiler
-Znext-solver: modify candidate preference rules
This implements the design proposed in the FCP in #132325 and matches the old solver behavior. I hope the inline comments are all sufficiently clear, I personally think this is a fairly clear improvement over the existing approach using `fn discard_impls_shadowed_by_env`. This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/96.
This also fixes#133639 which encounters an ICE in negative coherence when evaluating the where-clause. Given the features required to trigger this ICE 🤷
r? ``@compiler-errors``
Stabilize `#[diagnostic::do_not_recommend]`
This PR seeks to stabilize the `#[diagnostic::do_not_recommend]`attribute.
This attribute was first proposed as `#[do_not_recommend`] attribute in RFC 2397 (https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2397). It gives the crate authors the ability to not suggest to the compiler to not show certain traits in its error messages.
With the presence of the `#[diagnostic]` tool attribute namespace it was decided to move the attribute there, as that lowers the amount of guarantees the compiler needs to give about the exact way this influences error messages. It turns the attribute into a hint which can be ignored. In addition to the original proposed functionality this attribute now also hides the marked trait in help messages ("This trait is implemented by: ").
The attribute does not accept any argument and can only be placed on trait implementations. If it is placed somewhere else a lint warning is emitted and the attribute is otherwise ignored. If an argument is detected a lint warning is emitted and the argument is ignored. This follows the rules outlined by the diagnostic namespace.
This attribute allows crates like diesel to improve their error messages drastically. The most common example here is the following error message:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `&str: Expression` is not satisfied
--> /home/weiznich/Documents/rust/rust/tests/ui/diagnostic_namespace/do_not_recommend.rs:53:15
|
LL | SelectInt.check("bar");
| ^^^^^ the trait `Expression` is not implemented for `&str`, which is required by `&str: AsExpression<Integer>`
|
= help: the following other types implement trait `Expression`:
Bound<T>
SelectInt
note: required for `&str` to implement `AsExpression<Integer>`
--> /home/weiznich/Documents/rust/rust/tests/ui/diagnostic_namespace/do_not_recommend.rs:26:13
|
LL | impl<T, ST> AsExpression<ST> for T
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^
LL | where
LL | T: Expression<SqlType = ST>,
| ------------------------ unsatisfied trait bound introduced here
```
By applying the new attribute to the wild card trait implementation of
`AsExpression` for `T: Expression` the error message becomes:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `&str: AsExpression<Integer>` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/as_expression.rs:55:15
|
LL | SelectInt.check("bar");
| ^^^^^ the trait `AsExpression<Integer>` is not implemented for `&str`
|
= help: the trait `AsExpression<Text>` is implemented for `&str`
= help: for that trait implementation, expected `Text`, found `Integer`
```
which makes it much easier for users to understand that they are facing a type mismatch.
Other explored example usages include:
* This standard library error message: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/128008
* That bevy derived example:
e1f3068995/tests/ui/diagnostic_namespace/do_not_recommend/supress_suggestions_in_help.rs (No
more tuple pyramids)
Fixes#51992
r? ``@compiler-errors``
This PR also adds a few more tests, makes sure that all the tests are run for the old and new trait solver and adds a check that the attribute does not contain arguments.
```
warning: unknown lint: `test_unstable_lint`
--> $DIR/warn-unknown-unstable-lint-inline.rs:4:10
|
LL | #![allow(test_unstable_lint, another_unstable_lint)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: the `test_unstable_lint` lint is unstable
= help: add `#![feature(test_unstable_lint)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
note: the lint level is defined here
--> $DIR/warn-unknown-unstable-lint-inline.rs:3:9
|
LL | #![warn(unknown_lints)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
warning: unknown lint: `test_unstable_lint`
--> $DIR/warn-unknown-unstable-lint-inline.rs:4:29
|
LL | #![allow(test_unstable_lint, another_unstable_lint)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: the `test_unstable_lint` lint is unstable
= help: add `#![feature(test_unstable_lint)]` to the crate attributes to enable
= note: this compiler was built on YYYY-MM-DD; consider upgrading it if it is out of date
note: the lint level is defined here
--> $DIR/warn-unknown-unstable-lint-inline.rs:3:9
|
LL | #![warn(unknown_lints)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
This is particularly relevant when there are multiple lints in the same `warn` attribute. Pointing at the smaller span makes it clearer which one the warning is complaining about.
