Fixes#73026
See also: #64467, #89468
The issue stems from a `FatalError` being silently raised in
`panictry_buffer`. Normally this is not a problem, because
`panictry_buffer` emits the causes of the error, but they are not
themselves fatal, so they get filtered out by the silent emitter.
To fix this, we use a parser entrypoint which doesn't use
`panictry_buffer`, and we handle the error ourselves.
Report fatal lexer errors in `--cfg` command line arguments
Fixes#89358. The erroneous behavior was apparently introduced by `@Mark-Simulacrum` in a678e31911; the idea is to silence individual parser errors and instead emit one catch-all error message after parsing. However, for the example in #89358, a fatal lexer error is created here:
edebf77e00/compiler/rustc_parse/src/lexer/mod.rs (L340-L349)
This fatal error aborts the compilation, and so the call to `new_parser_from_source_str()` never returns and the catch-all error message is never emitted. I have therefore changed the `SilentEmitter` to silence only non-fatal errors; with my changes, for the rustc invocation described in #89358:
```sh
rustc --cfg "abc\""
```
I get the following output:
```
error[E0765]: unterminated double quote string
|
= note: this error occurred on the command line: `--cfg=abc"`
```
Instead of updating global state to mark attributes as used,
we now explicitly emit a warning when an attribute is used in
an unsupported position. As a side effect, we are to emit more
detailed warning messages (instead of just a generic "unused" message).
`Session.check_name` is removed, since its only purpose was to mark
the attribute as used. All of the callers are modified to use
`Attribute.has_name`
Additionally, `AttributeType::AssumedUsed` is removed - an 'assumed
used' attribute is implemented by simply not performing any checks
in `CheckAttrVisitor` for a particular attribute.
We no longer emit unused attribute warnings for the `#[rustc_dummy]`
attribute - it's an internal attribute used for tests, so it doesn't
mark sense to treat it as 'unused'.
With this commit, a large source of global untracked state is removed.
* On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format
* When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline
* Color highlight modified span
Those annotation are silently ignored rather than begin validated
against compiler output. Update them before validation is enabled,
to avoid test failures.
Unfortunately, the diagnotic machinery does not cope well with an empty
span which can happen if the crate is empty, in which case we merely set
a spanless note.
resolve: Improve candidate search for unresolved macro suggestions
Use same scope visiting machinery for both collecting suggestion candidates and actually resolving the names.
The PR is better read in per-commit fashion with whitespace changes ignored (the first commit in particular moves some code around).
This should be the last pre-requisite for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/62086.
r? @davidtwco
Normally `#![feature(...)]` shouldn't change behavior, but custom attributes in particular are in the process of retirement, and we should not produce a message telling to enable them.
It also helps with unifying diagnostics for unresolved macros.
compiletest: Introduce `// {check,build,run}-pass` pass modes
Pass UI tests now have three modes
```
// check-pass
// build-pass
// run-pass
```
mirroring equivalent well-known `cargo` commands.
`// check-pass` will compile the test skipping codegen (which is expensive and isn't supposed to fail in most cases).
`// build-pass` will compile and link the test without running it.
`// run-pass` will compile, link and run the test.
Tests without a "pass" annotation are still considered "fail" tests.
Most UI tests would probably want to switch to `check-pass`.
Tests validating codegen would probably want to run the generated code as well and use `run-pass`.
`build-pass` should probably be rare (linking tests?).
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/61755 will provide a way to run the tests with any mode, e.g. bump `check-pass` tests to `run-pass` to satisfy especially suspicious people, and be able to make sure that codegen doesn't breaks in some entirely unexpected way.
Tests marked with any mode are expected to pass with any other mode, if that's not the case for some legitimate reason, then the test should be made a "fail" test rather than a "pass" test.
Perhaps some secondary CI can verify this invariant, but that's not super urgent.
`// compile-pass` still works and is equivalent to `build-pass`.
Why is `// compile-pass` bad - 1) it gives an impression that the test is only compiled, but not linked, 2) it doesn't mirror a cargo command.
It can be removed some time in the future in a separate PR.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61712
