Avoid some allocations in the macro parser
These three commits reduce the number of heap allocations done when compiling rustc-benchmarks/html5ever-2016-08-25 by 20%, from 16.5M to 13.3M. This speeds up (debug) compilation of it with a stage1 compiler by about 7%.
macros: fix partially consumed tokens in macro matchers
Fixes#37175.
This PR also avoids re-transcribing the tokens consumed by a matcher (and cloning the `TtReader` once per matcher), which improves expansion performance of the test case from #34630 by ~8%.
r? @nrc
macros 1.1: future proofing and cleanup
This PR
- uses the macro namespace for custom derives (instead of a dedicated custom derive namespace),
- relaxes the shadowing rules for `#[macro_use]`-imported custom derives to match the shadowing rules for ordinary `#[macro_use]`-imported macros, and
- treats custom derive `extern crate`s like empty modules so that we can eventually allow, for example, `extern crate serde_derive; use serde_derive::Serialize;` backwards compatibly.
r? @alexcrichton
This commit changes `ExtCtx::cfg()` so it returns a `CrateConfig`
reference instead of a clone. As a result, it also changes all of the
`cfg()` callsites to explicitly clone... except one, because the commit
also changes `macro_parser::parse()` to take `&CrateConfig`. This is
good, because that function can be hot, and `CrateConfig` is expensive
to clone.
This change almost halves the number of heap allocations done by rustc
for `html5ever` in rustc-benchmarks suite, which makes compilation 1.20x
faster.
This commit blanket renames the `rustc_macro` infrastructure to `proc_macro`,
which reflects the general consensus of #35900. A follow up PR to Cargo will be
required to purge the `rustc-macro` name as well.
Enforce the shadowing restrictions from RFC 1560 for today's macros
This PR enforces a weakened version of the shadowing restrictions from RFC 1560. More specifically,
- If a macro expansion contains a `macro_rules!` macro definition that is used outside of the expansion, the defined macro may not shadow an existing macro.
- If a macro expansion contains a `#[macro_use] extern crate` macro import that is used outside of the expansion, the imported macro may not shadow an existing macro.
This is a [breaking-change]. For example,
```rust
macro_rules! m { () => {} }
macro_rules! n { () => {
macro_rules! m { () => {} } //< This shadows an existing macro.
m!(); //< This is inside the expansion that generated `m`'s definition, so it is OK.
} }
n!();
m!(); //< This use of `m` is outside the expansion, so it causes the shadowing to be an error.
```
r? @nrc
This commit makes the return type of AstBuilder.stmt_let_typed match the return type of other AstBuilder.stmt* functions. This avoids unnecessary boxing/unboxing whenever Stmt's are stored in a Vec, which is the default use case.nnThis is a potentially plugin breaking change.
Allow more non-inline modules in blocks
Currently, non-inline modules without a `#[path]` attribute are not allowed in blocks.
This PR allows non-inline modules that have an ancestor module with a `#[path]` attribute, provided there is not a nearer ancestor block.
For example,
```rust
fn main() {
#[path = "..."] mod foo {
mod bar; //< allowed by this PR
fn f() {
mod bar; //< still an error
}
}
}
```
Fixes#36772.
r? @nikomatsakis
I am using `ThinAttributes` rather than a vector for attributes
attached to generics, since I expect almost all lifetime and types
parameters to not carry any attributes.
Adds a `ProcMacro` form of syntax extension
This commit adds syntax extension forms matching the types for procedural macros 2.0 (RFC #1566), these still require the usual syntax extension boiler plate, but this is a first step towards proper implementation and should be useful for macros 1.1 stuff too.
Supports both attribute-like and function-like macros.
Note that RFC #1566 has not been accepted yet, but I think there is consensus that we want to head in vaguely that direction and so this PR will be useful in any case. It is also fairly easy to undo and does not break any existing programs.
This is related to #35957 in that I hope it can be used in the implementation of macros 1.1, however, there is no direct overlap and is more of a complement than a competing proposal. There is still a fair bit of work to do before the two can be combined.
r? @jseyfried
cc @alexcrichton, @cgswords, @eddyb, @aturon
This commit adds syntax extension forms matching the types for procedural macros 2.0 (RFC #1566), these still require the usual syntax extension boiler plate, but this is a first step towards proper implementation and should be useful for macros 1.1 stuff too.
Supports both attribute-like and function-like macros.
