Fixing confusion between mod and remainder
Like many programming languages, rust too confuses remainder and modulus. The `%` operator and the associated `Rem` trait is (as the trait name suggests) the remainder, but since most people are linguistically more familiar with the modulus the documentation sometimes claims otherwise. This PR tries to fix this problem in rustc.
Libs-API decided to remove these in #102697.
Follow-up to #107023, which removed them from `compiler/`, but a couple new ones showed up since that was merged.
They *are* representable by traits, even if the short-circuiting
behaviour requires a different approach than the non-short-circuiting
operators. For an example proposal, see the postponed RFC 2722.
As it is not accurate, reword the note.
Remove unused symbols and diagnostic items
As the title suggests, this removes unused symbols from `sym::` and `#[rustc_diagnostic_item]` annotations that weren't mentioned anywhere.
Originally I tried to use grep, to find symbols and item names that are never mentioned via `sym::name`, however this produced a lot of false positives (?), for example clippy matching on `Symbol::as_str` or macros "implicitly" adding `sym::`. I ended up fixing all these false positives (?) by hand, but tbh I'm not sure if it was worth it...
`.into_iter()` on arrays was slower than it needed to be (especially compared to slice iterator) since it uses `Range<usize>`, which needs to handle degenerate ranges like `10..4`.
This PR adds an internal `IndexRange` type that's like `Range<usize>` but with a safety invariant that means it doesn't need to worry about those cases -- it only handles `start <= end` -- and thus can give LLVM more information to optimize better.
I added one simple demonstration of the improvement as a codegen test.
It looks like the last time had left some remaining cfg's -- which made me think
that the stage0 bump was actually successful. This brings us to a released 1.62
beta though.
Using an obviously-placeholder syntax. An RFC would still be needed before this could have any chance at stabilization, and it might be removed at any point.
But I'd really like to have it in nightly at least to ensure it works well with try_trait_v2, especially as we refactor the traits.
When encountering an unsatisfied trait bound, if there are no other
suggestions, mention all the types that *do* implement that trait:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `f32: Foo` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:22:6
|
LL | impl Baz<f32> for f32 { }
| ^^^^^^^^ the trait `Foo` is not implemented for `f32`
|
= help: the following other types implement trait `Foo`:
Option<T>
i32
str
note: required by a bound in `Baz`
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:18:31
|
LL | trait Baz<U: ?Sized> where U: Foo { }
| ^^^ required by this bound in `Baz`
```
Mention implementers of traits in `ImplObligation`s.
Do not mention other `impl`s for closures, ranges and `?`.
