Before this fix, the debuginfo for the fields was generated from the
struct defintion of Box<T>, but (at least at the moment) the compiler
pretends that Box<T> is just a (fat) pointer, so the fields need to be
`pointer` and `vtable` instead of `__0: Unique<T>` and `__1: Allocator`.
This is meant as a temporary mitigation until we can make sure that
simply treating Box as a regular struct in debuginfo does not cause too
much breakage in the ecosystem.
interpret/memory: simplify check_and_deref_ptr
*Finally* I saw a way to make this code simpler. The odd preprocessing in `let ptr_or_addr =` has bothered me since forever, but it actually became unnecessary in the last provenance refactoring. :)
This also leads to slightly more explicit error messages as a nice side-effect. 🎉
r? `@oli-obk`
Better errors when a Copy impl on a Struct is not self-consistent
As discovered in a Zulip thread with `@nnethercote` and `@Mark-Simulacrum,` it's not immediately obvious why a field on an ADT doesn't implement `Copy`. This PR attempts to give slightly more detailed information by spinning up a fulfillment context to try to dig down and discover transitive fulfillment errors that cause `is_copy_modulo_regions` to fail on a ADT field.
The error message still kinda sucks, but should only show up in the case that an existing error message was totally missing... so I think it's a good compromise for now?
diagnostics: do not suggest `fn foo({ <body> }`
Instead of suggesting that the body always replace the last character on the line, presuming it must be a semicolon, the parser should instead check what the last character is, and append the body if it is anything else.
Fixes#83104
Rename `~const Drop` to `~const Destruct`
r? `@oli-obk`
Completely switching to `~const Destructible` would be rather complicated, so it seems best to add it for now and wait for it to be backported to beta in the next release.
The rationale is to prevent complications such as #92149 and #94803 by introducing an entirely new trait. And `~const Destructible` reads a bit better than `~const Drop`. Name Bikesheddable.
Modernize `alloc-no-oom-handling` test
- The edition should be 2021 to avoid warnings.
- The `external_crate` feature was removed in commit 45bf1ed1a1 ("rustc: Allow changing the default allocator").
Note that commit d620ae1070 ("Auto merge of #84266") removed the old test, but the new one introduced passed the `--cfg` like in the old one.
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
---
This is intended to align this test to the new `no_rc` and `no_sync` ones being added in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89891, but it makes sense on its own too.
Fold aarch64 feature +fp into +neon
Arm's FEAT_FP and Feat_AdvSIMD describe the same thing on AArch64:
The Neon unit, which handles both floating point and SIMD instructions.
Moreover, a configuration for AArch64 must include both or neither.
Arm says "entirely proprietary" toolchains may omit floating point:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/102374/0101/Data-processing---floating-point
In the Programmer's Guide for Armv8-A, Arm says AArch64 can have
both FP and Neon or neither in custom implementations:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/den0024/a/AArch64-Floating-point-and-NEON
In "Bare metal boot code for Armv8-A", enabling Neon and FP
is just disabling the same trap flag:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/dai0527/a
In an unlikely future where "Neon and FP" become unrelated,
we can add "[+-]fp" as its own feature flag.
Until then, we can simplify programming with Rust on AArch64 by
folding both into "[+-]neon", which is valid as it supersets both.
"[+-]neon" is retained for niche uses such as firmware, kernels,
"I just hate floats", and so on.
I am... pretty sure no one is relying on this.
An argument could be made that, as we are not an "entirely proprietary" toolchain, we should not support AArch64 without floats at all. I think that's a bit excessive. However, I want to recognize the intent: programming for AArch64 should be simplified where possible. For x86-64, programmers regularly set up illegal feature configurations because it's hard to understand them, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/89586. And per the above notes, plus the discussion in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/86941, there should be no real use cases for leaving these features split: the two should in fact always go together.
- Fixesrust-lang/rust#95002.
- Fixesrust-lang/rust#95064.
- Fixesrust-lang/rust#95122.
Instead of suggesting that the body always replace the last character on the
line, presuming it must be a semicolon, the parser should instead check what
the last character is, and append the body if it is anything else.
Fixes#83104
Arm's FEAT_FP and Feat_AdvSIMD describe the same thing on AArch64:
The Neon unit, which handles both floating point and SIMD instructions.
Moreover, a configuration for AArch64 must include both or neither.
Arm says "entirely proprietary" toolchains may omit floating point:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/102374/0101/Data-processing---floating-point
In the Programmer's Guide for Armv8-A, Arm says AArch64 can have
both FP and Neon or neither in custom implementations:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/den0024/a/AArch64-Floating-point-and-NEON
In "Bare metal boot code for Armv8-A", enabling Neon and FP
is just disabling the same trap flag:
https://developer.arm.com/documentation/dai0527/a
In an unlikely future where "Neon and FP" become unrelated,
we can add "[+-]fp" as its own feature flag.
Until then, we can simplify programming with Rust on AArch64 by
folding both into "[+-]neon", which is valid as it supersets both.
"[+-]neon" is retained for niche uses such as firmware, kernels,
"I just hate floats", and so on.
- The edition should be 2021 to avoid warnings.
- The `external_crate` feature was removed in commit 45bf1ed1a1
("rustc: Allow changing the default allocator").
Note that commit d620ae1070 ("Auto merge of #84266") removed
the old test, but the new one introduced passed the `--cfg` like
in the old one.
Signed-off-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Suggest constraining param for unary ops when missing trait impl
This PR adds a suggestion of constraining param for unary ops `-` and `!` when the corresponding trait implementation
is missing.
Fixs #94543.
BTW, this is my first time to touch rustc, please correct me if I did anything wrong.
Return err instead of ICE
Having `escaping_bound_vars` results in ICE when trying to create `ty::Binder::dummy`, to avoid it we return err like the line above. I think this requires a more sophisticated fix, I would love to investigate if mentorship is available 🤓Fixes#95023 and #85350
Don't run UB in test suite
This splits `ui/unsafe/union.rs` to make it so only the non-UB parts are run. It also means we can do more testing of the location of error messages (which are a bit different with the THIR unsafety checker). `union-modification.rs` has no UB (according to Miri), and `union.rs` has errors (but would have UB if not for those errors).
Closes#95075.
r? `@bjorn3`
suggest removing type ascription in bad parsing position
Not sure how to test this with the non-nightly suggestion. Didn't add a new UI test because it already manifests in an existing UI test.
Fixes#95014
Fix debuginfo tests with GDB 11.2
GDB 11.2 added support for DW_ATE_UTF, which caused some test
failures. This fixes these tests by changing the format that is used,
and adds a new test to verify that characters are emitted as something
that GDB can print in a char-like way.
Fixes#94458
Always evaluate all cfg predicate in all() and any()
This pull-request adjust the handling of the `all()` and `any()` to always evaluate every cfg predicate because not doing so result in accepting incorrect `cfg`:
```rust
#[cfg(any(unix, foo::bar))] // Should error on foo::bar, but does not on unix platform (but does on non unix platform)
fn foo1() {}
#[cfg(all(foo, foo::bar))] // Should error on foo::bar, but does not
fn foo2() {}
#[cfg(all(foo::bar, foo))] // Correctly error on foo::bar
fn foo3() {}
#[cfg(any(foo::bar, foo))] // Correctly error on foo::bar
fn foo4() {}
```
This pull-request take the side to directly turn it into a hard error instead of having a future incompatibility lint because the combination to get this incorrect behavior is unusual and highly probable that some code have this without noticing.
A [search](https://cs.github.com/?scopeName=All+repos&scope=&q=lang%3Arust+%2Fany%5C%28%5Ba-zA-Z%5D%2C+%5Ba-zA-Z%5D%2B%3A%3A%5Ba-zA-Z%5D%2B%2F) on Github reveal no such instance nevertheless a Crater run should probably be done before merging this.
This was discover in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/94175 when trying to lint on the second predicate. Also note that this seems to have being introduce with Rust 1.27.0: https://rust.godbolt.org/z/KnfqKv15f.
r? `@petrochenkov`
