Whenever we parse a chain of binary operations, as long as the first
operation is `<` and the subsequent operations are either `>` or `<`,
present the following diagnostic help:
use `::<...>` instead of `<...>` if you meant to specify type arguments
This will lead to spurious recommendations on situations like
`2 < 3 < 4` but should be clear from context that the help doesn't apply
in that case.
fix#40294 obligation cause.body_id is not always a NodeExpr
Hello!
This fixes#40294 and moves tests related to #38812 to a much more sensible directory.
Thanks to @nikomatsakis and @eddyb
Fix suggestion span error with a line containing multibyte characters
This PR fixes broken suggestions caused by multibyte characters.
e.g. for this code, rustc provides a broken suggestion ([playground](https://is.gd/DWGLu7)):
```rust
fn main() {
let tup = (1,);
println!("☃{}", tup[0]);
}
```
```
error: cannot index a value of type `({integer},)`
--> <anon>:3:21
|
3 | println!("☃{}", tup[0]);
| ^^^^^^
|
help: to access tuple elements, use tuple indexing syntax as shown
| println!("☃{}"tup.00]);
error: aborting due to previous error
```
`CodeSuggestion::splice_lines` is misusing `Loc.col` (`CharPos`) as a byte offset when slicing source.
When declaring nested unsafe blocks (`unsafe {unsafe {}}`) that trigger
the "unnecessary `unsafe` block" error, point out the enclosing `unsafe
block` or `unsafe fn` that makes it unnecessary.
Group "missing variable bind" spans in `or` matches and clarify wording
for the two possible cases: when a variable from the first pattern is
not in any of the subsequent patterns, and when a variable in any of the
other patterns is not in the first one.
Before:
```
error[E0408]: variable `a` from pattern #1 is not bound in pattern #2
--> file.rs:10:23
|
10 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => { println!("{:?}", a); }
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ pattern doesn't bind `a`
error[E0408]: variable `b` from pattern #2 is not bound in pattern #1
--> file.rs:10:32
|
10 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => { println!("{:?}", a); }
| ^ pattern doesn't bind `b`
error[E0408]: variable `a` from pattern #1 is not bound in pattern #3
--> file.rs:10:37
|
10 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => { println!("{:?}", a); }
| ^^^^^^^^ pattern doesn't bind `a`
error[E0408]: variable `d` from pattern #1 is not bound in pattern #3
--> file.rs:10:37
|
10 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => { println!("{:?}", a); }
| ^^^^^^^^ pattern doesn't bind `d`
error[E0408]: variable `c` from pattern #3 is not bound in pattern #1
--> file.rs:10:43
|
10 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => { println!("{:?}", a); }
| ^ pattern doesn't bind `c`
error[E0408]: variable `d` from pattern #1 is not bound in pattern #4
--> file.rs:10:48
|
10 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => { println!("{:?}", a); }
| ^^^^^^^^ pattern doesn't bind `d`
error: aborting due to 6 previous errors
```
After:
```
error[E0408]: variable `a` is not bound in all patterns
--> file.rs:20:37
|
20 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => {
intln!("{:?}", a); }
| - ^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ - variable
t in all patterns
| | | |
| | | pattern doesn't bind `a`
| | pattern doesn't bind `a`
| variable not in all patterns
error[E0408]: variable `d` is not bound in all patterns
--> file.rs:20:37
|
20 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => {
intln!("{:?}", a); }
| - - ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ pattern
esn't bind `d`
| | | |
| | | pattern doesn't bind `d`
| | variable not in all patterns
| variable not in all patterns
error[E0408]: variable `b` is not bound in all patterns
--> file.rs:20:37
|
20 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => {
intln!("{:?}", a); }
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ - ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ pattern
esn't bind `b`
| | | |
| | | pattern doesn't bind `b`
| | variable not in all patterns
| pattern doesn't bind `b`
error[E0408]: variable `c` is not bound in all patterns
--> file.rs:20:48
|
20 | T::T1(a, d) | T::T2(d, b) | T::T3(c) | T::T4(a) => {
intln!("{:?}", a); }
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^ - ^^^^^^^^ pattern
esn't bind `c`
| | | |
| | | variable not in all
tterns
| | pattern doesn't bind `c`
| pattern doesn't bind `c`
error: aborting due to 4 previous errors
```
* Have only one presentation for binding consistency errors
* Point to same binding in multiple patterns when possible
* Check inconsistent bindings in all arms
* Simplify wording of diagnostic message
* Sort emition and spans of binding errors for deterministic output
transition borrowck to visit all **bodies** and not item-likes
This is a better structure for incremental compilation and also more compatible with the eventual borrowck mir. It also fixes#38520 as a drive-by fix.
r? @eddyb
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/40180
This calling convention can be used for definining interrupt handlers on
32-bit and 64-bit x86 targets. The compiler then uses `iret` instead of
`ret` for returning and ensures that all registers are restored to their
original values.
Usage:
```
extern "x86-interrupt" fn handler(stack_frame: &ExceptionStackFrame) {…}
```
for interrupts and exceptions without error code and
```
extern "x86-interrupt" fn page_fault_handler(stack_frame: &ExceptionStackFrame,
error_code: u64) {…}
```
for exceptions that push an error code (e.g., page faults or general
protection faults). The programmer must ensure that the correct version
is used for each interrupt.
For more details see the [LLVM PR][1] and the corresponding [proposal][2].
[1]: https://reviews.llvm.org/D15567
[2]: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/2015-September/045171.html
These are some samples that I have been focusing on improving over
time. In this PR, I mainly want to stem the bleeding where we in some
cases we show an error that gives you no possible way to divine the
problem.
[MIR] SwitchInt Everywhere
Something I've been meaning to do for a very long while. This PR essentially gets rid of 3 kinds of conditional branching and only keeps the most general one - `SwitchInt`. Primary benefits are such that dealing with MIR now does not involve dealing with 3 different ways to do conditional control flow. On the other hand, constructing a `SwitchInt` currently requires more code than what previously was necessary to build an equivalent `If` terminator. Something trivially "fixable" with some constructor methods somewhere (MIR needs stuff like that badly in general).
Some timings (tl;dr: slightly faster^1 (unexpected), but also uses slightly more memory at peak (expected)):
^1: Not sure if the speed benefits are because of LLVM liking the generated code better or the compiler itself getting compiled better. Either way, its a net benefit. The CORE and SYNTAX timings done for compilation without optimisation.
```
AFTER:
Building stage1 std artifacts (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 31.50 secs
Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 31.42 secs
Building stage1 compiler artifacts (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 439.56 secs
Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 435.15 secs
CORE: 99% (24.81 real, 0.13 kernel, 24.57 user); 358536k resident
CORE: 99% (24.56 real, 0.15 kernel, 24.36 user); 359168k resident
SYNTAX: 99% (49.98 real, 0.48 kernel, 49.42 user); 653416k resident
SYNTAX: 99% (50.07 real, 0.58 kernel, 49.43 user); 653604k resident
BEFORE:
Building stage1 std artifacts (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 31.84 secs
Building stage1 compiler artifacts (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 451.17 secs
CORE: 99% (24.66 real, 0.20 kernel, 24.38 user); 351096k resident
CORE: 99% (24.36 real, 0.17 kernel, 24.18 user); 352284k resident
SYNTAX: 99% (52.24 real, 0.56 kernel, 51.66 user); 645544k resident
SYNTAX: 99% (51.55 real, 0.48 kernel, 50.99 user); 646428k resident
```
cc @nikomatsakis @eddyb
improve error message when two-arg assert_eq! receives a trailing comma
Previously, `assert_eq!(left, right,)` (respectively, `assert_ne!(left,
right,)`; note the trailing comma) would result in a confusing "requires
at least a format string argument" error. In reality, a format string is
optional, but the trailing comma puts us into the "match a token tree of
zero or more tokens" branch of the macro (in order to support the
optional format string), and passing the empty token tree into
`format_args!` results in the confusing error. If instead we match a
token tree of one or more tokens, we get a much more sensible
"unexpected end of macro invocation" error.
While we're here, fix up a stray space before a comma in the match
guards.
Resolves#39369.
-----
**Before:**
```
$ rustc scratch.rs
error: requires at least a format string argument
--> scratch.rs:2:5
|
2 | assert_eq!(1, 2,);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: this error originates in a macro outside of the current crate
error: aborting due to previous error
```
**After:**
```
$ ./build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1/bin/rustc scratch.rs
error: unexpected end of macro invocation
--> scratch.rs:2:20
|
2 | assert_eq!(1, 2,);
| ^
```
Improve error message for uninferrable types #38812
Hello,
I tried to improve the error message for uninferrable types. The error code is `E0282`.
```rust
error[E0282]: type annotations needed
--> /home/cengizIO/issue38812.rs:2:11
|
2 | let x = vec![];
| - ^^^^^^ cannot infer type for `T`
| |
| consider giving `x` a type
|
= note: this error originates in a macro outside of the current crate
```
and
```rust
error[E0282]: type annotations needed
--> /home/cengizIO/issue38812.rs:2:15
|
2 | let (x,) = (vec![],);
| ---- ^^^^^^ cannot infer type for `T`
| |
| consider giving a type to pattern
|
= note: this error originates in a macro outside of the current crate
```
Rust compiler now tries to find uninferred `local`s with type `_` and adds them into the error message.
I'm probably wrong on wording that I used. Please feel free to suggest better alternatives.
Thanks @nikomatsakis for mentoring 🍺
Any comments/feedback is more than welcome!
Thank you
Previously, `assert_eq!(left, right,)` (respectively, `assert_ne!(left,
right,)`; note the trailing comma) would result in a confusing "requires
at least a format string argument" error. In reality, a format string is
optional, but the trailing comma puts us into the "match a token tree of
zero or more tokens" branch of the macro (in order to support the
optional format string), and passing the empty token tree into
`format_args!` results in the confusing error. If instead we match a
token tree of one or more tokens, we get a much more sensible
"unexpected end of macro invocation" error.
While we're here, fix up a stray space before a comma in the match
guards.
Resolves#39369.
This is the full and proper fix for #32330. This also makes some effort
to give a nice error message (as evidenced by the `ui` test), sending
users over to the tracking issue for a full explanation.
Don't suggest to use things which weren't found either
Fixes#38054
The best code I can come up with, suggestions are welcome.
Basically, removing ```. Did you mean to use `DoesntExist1`?``` in the code below, because it is useless.
```rust
error[E0432]: unresolved import `DoesntExist1`
--> src/lib.rs:1:5
|
1 | use DoesntExist1;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `DoesntExist1` in the root
error[E0432]: unresolved import `DoesntExist2`
--> src/lib.rs:2:5
|
2 | use DoesntExist2;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `DoesntExist2` in the root. Did you mean to use `DoesntExist1`?
```
Expand derive macros in the MacroExpander
This removes the expand_derives function, and sprinkles the functionality throughout the Invocation Collector, Expander and Resolver.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/39326
r? @jseyfried
