Recover `mut $pat` and other improvements
- Recover on e.g. `mut Foo(x, y)` and suggest `Foo(mut x, mut y)`. Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/63764.
- Recover on e.g. `let mut mut x;`
- Recover on e.g. `let keyword` and `let keyword(...)`.
- Cleanups in `token.rs` with `fn is_non_raw_ident_where` and friends.
debuginfo: give unique names to closure and generator types
Closure types have been moved to the namespace where they
are defined, and both closure and generator type names now
include the disambiguator.
This fixes an exception when lldb prints nested closures.
Fixes#57822
I haven't included the `DW_AT_artificial` changes discussed in #57822 because they make the output worse IMO, but I can easily add these if still required. For example, for the new test case the output is now:
```
(lldb) p g
(issue_57822::main::closure-1) $1 = closure-1(closure(1))
```
but adding `DW_AT_artificial` changes this to:
```
(lldb) p g
(issue_57822::main::closure-1) $0 = closure-1 {
}
```
Note that nested generators didn't cause the exception. I haven't determined why, but I think it makes sense to add the disambiguator for them too. It feels like we still don't really understand why closures were causing an error though.
r? @michaelwoerister
Propagate spans and attributes from proc macro definitions
Thanks to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/63269 we now have spans and attributes from proc macro definitions available in metadata.
However, that PR didn't actually put them into use! This PR finishes that work.
Attributes `rustc_macro_transparency`, `allow_internal_unstable`, `allow_internal_unsafe`, `local_inner_macros`, `rustc_builtin_macro`, `stable`, `unstable`, `rustc_deprecated`, `deprecated` now have effect when applied to proc macro definition functions.
From those attributes only `deprecated` is both stable and supposed to be used in new code.
(`#![staged_api]` still cannot be used in proc macro crates for unrelated reasons though.)
`Span::def_site` from the proc macro API now returns the correct location of the proc macro definition.
Also, I made a mistake in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/63269#discussion_r312702919, loaded proc macros didn't actually use the resolver cache.
This PR fixes the caching issue, now proc macros go through the `Resolver::macro_map` cache as well.
(Also, the first commit turns `proc_macro::quote` into a regular built-in macro to reduce the number of places where `SyntaxExtension`s need to be manually created.)
libtest: add --show-output flag to print stdout of successful tests
This pull request adds a new flag `--show-output` for tests to show the output of successful tests. For most formatters this was already supported just not exposed via the CLI (apparently only used by `librustdoc`). I've also added support for this option in the JSON formatter.
This kind of fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/54669 which wants `--format json` to work with `--nocapture`, which is... well, impossible. What this issue really calls for is `--show-output` as implemented here.
Fully implement or-pattern parsing
Builds upon the initial parsing in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/61708 to fully implement or-pattern (`p | q`) parsing as specified in [the grammar section of RFC 2535](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2535-or-patterns.md#grammar).
Noteworthy:
- We allow or-patterns in `[p | q, ...]`.
- We allow or-patterns in `let` statements and `for` expressions including with leading `|`.
- We improve recovery for `p || q` (+ tests for that in `multiple-pattern-typo.rs`).
- We improve recovery for `| p | q` in inner patterns (tests in `or-patterns-syntactic-fail.rs`).
- We rigorously test or-pattern parsing (in `or-patterns-syntactic-{pass,fail}.rs`).
- We harden the feature gating tests.
- We do **_not_** change `ast.rs`. That is, `ExprKind::Let.0` and `Arm.pats` still accept `Vec<P<Pat>>`.
I was starting work on that but it would be cleaner to do this in a separate PR so this one has a narrower scope.
cc @dlrobertson
cc the tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/54883.
r? @estebank
Point at method call on missing annotation error
Make it clearer where the type name that couldn't be inferred comes from.
Before:
```
error[E0282]: type annotations needed
--> src/test/ui/span/type-annotations-needed-expr.rs:2:13
|
2 | let _ = (vec![1,2,3]).into_iter().sum() as f64; //~ ERROR E0282
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot infer type for `S`
|
= note: type must be known at this point
```
after
```
error[E0282]: type annotations needed
--> src/test/ui/span/type-annotations-needed-expr.rs:2:39
|
2 | let _ = (vec![1,2,3]).into_iter().sum() as f64; //~ ERROR E0282
| ^^^ cannot infer type for `S`
|
= note: type must be known at this point
```
CC #63852.
Permit unwinding through FFI by default
This repeats #62505 for master (Rust 1.38+), as #58794 is not yet resolved. This is a stopgap until a stable alternative is available, like [RFC 2699](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2699), as long as progress is being made to that end.
r? @joshtriplett
Closure types have been moved to the namespace where they
are defined, and both closure and generator type names now
include the disambiguator.
This fixes an exception when lldb prints nested closures.
Fixes#57822
Suggest calling closure with resolved return type when appropriate
Follow up to #63337. CC #63100.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/fn-or-tuple-struct-without-args.rs:46:20
|
LL | let closure = || 42;
| -- closure defined here
LL | let _: usize = closure;
| ^^^^^^^
| |
| expected usize, found closure
| help: use parentheses to call this closure: `closure()`
|
= note: expected type `usize`
found type `[closure@$DIR/fn-or-tuple-struct-without-args.rs:45:19: 45:24]`
```
