check_match: don't treat privately uninhabited types as uninhabited
Fixes#38972, which is a regression in 1.16 from @canndrew's patchset.
r? @nikomatsakis
beta-nominating because regression.
Use ARM instead of SystemZ for testing uninstalled targets
This needs some explanation.
`config.toml` has section `targets` listing backends that are built during LLVM build:
```
targets = "X86;ARM;AArch64;Mips;PowerPC;SystemZ;JSBackend;MSP430;Sparc;NVPTX"
```
It would be reasonable to expect that `targets = "X86"` would be enough for doing a local build in typical case (building on x86 and not working on some non-x86 platform-specific functionality).
However, for `x.py test` to pass successfully you have to add ARM and SystemZ to the target list as well (`targets = "X86;ARM;SystemZ"`), because two tests (`compile-fail/issue-37131.rs` and `run-make\target-without-atomics`) require these architectures to be enabled in LLVM.
This patch moves `compile-fail/issue-37131.rs` from SystemZ to ARM, so `targets = "X86;ARM"` becomes sufficient for running the full test suite without errors.
Report full details of inference errors
When the old suggestion machinery was removed by @brson in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/37057, it was not completely removed. There was a bit of code that had the job of going through errors and finding those for which suggestions were applicable, and it remained, causing us not to emit the full details of such errors. This PR removes that.
I've also added various lifetime tests to the UI test suite (so you can also see the before/after there). I have some concrete thoughts on how to improve these cases and am planning on writing those up in some mentoring issues (@CengizIO has expressed interest in working on those changes, so I plan to work with him on it, at least to start).
cc @jonathandturner
Adding compile fail test for staged_api feature
Issue #39059
r? @est31
@est31 running the tests for this feature fails. Is that expected since this is the `compile-fail`suite?
I copied this test from the run-pass suite: `rust/src/test/run-pass/reachable-unnameable-type-alias.rs`. What are the differences between these suites in operation and why they are used?
[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
macros: fix inert attributes from `proc_macro_derives` with `#![feature(proc_macro)]`
This PR refactors collection of `proc_macro_derive` invocations to fix#39347.
After this PR, the input to a `#[proc_macro_derive]` function no longer sees `#[derive]`s on the underlying item. For example, consider:
```rust
extern crate my_derives;
use my_derives::{Trait, Trait2};
#[derive(Copy, Clone)]
#[derive(Trait)]
#[derive(Trait2)]
struct S;
```
Today, the input to the `Trait` derive is `#[derive(Copy, Clone, Trait2)] struct S;`, and the input to the `Trait2` derive is `#[derive(Copy, Clone)] struct S;`. More generally, a `proc_macro_derive` sees all builtin derives, as well as all `proc_macro_derive`s listed *after* the one being invoked.
After this PR, both `Trait` and `Trait2` will see `struct S;`.
This is a [breaking-change], but I believe it is highly unlikely to cause breakage in practice.
r? @nrc
Stabilize static lifetime in statics
Stabilize the "static_in_const" feature. Blockers before this PR can be merged:
* [x] The [FCP with inclination to stabilize](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/35897#issuecomment-270441437) needs to be over. FCP lasts roughly three weeks, so will be over at Jan 25, aka this thursday.
* [x] Documentation needs to be added (#37928)
Closes#35897.
