support pub(restricted) in thread_local! (round 2)
Resurrected #40984 now that the issue blocking it was fixed. Original description:
`pub(restricted)` was stabilized in #40556 so let's go!
Here is a [playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?gist=f55f32f164a6ed18c219fec8f8293b98&version=nightly&backtrace=1).
I changed the interface of `__thread_local_inner!`, which is supposedly unstable but this is not checked for macros (#34097 cc @petrochenkov @jseyfried), so this may be an issue.
Thread local try with
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2030 was turned into this PR (the RFC was closed, but it looks like just a PR should be good).
See also: state stabilization issue: #27716
`try_with` is used in two places in std: stdio and thread_info. In stdio, it would be better if the result was passed to the closure, but in thread_info, it's better as is where the result is returned from the function call. I'm not sure which is better, but I prefer the current way as it better represents the scope.
Implement Eq/Hash/Debug etc. for unsized tuples.
As I mentioned in [the comment in #18469](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/18469#issuecomment-306767422), the implementations of `PartialEq`, `Eq`, `PartialOrd`, `Ord`, `Debug`, `Hash` can be generalized to unsized tuples.
This is consistent with the `derive` behavior for unsized structs.
```rust
#[derive(Clone, Copy, PartialEq, Eq, PartialOrd, Ord, Debug, Default, Hash)]
struct MyTuple<X, Y, Z: ?Sized>(X, Y, Z);
fn f(x: &MyTuple<i32, i32, [i32]>) {
x == x;
x < x;
println!("{:?}", x);
}
```
Questions:
- Need an RFC?
- Need a feature gate? I don't think it does because the unsized tuple coercion #42527 is feature-gated.
- I changed `builder.field($name);` into `builder.field(&$name);` in the `Debug` implementation to pass compilation. This won't affect the behavior because `Debug for &'a T` is a mere redirection to `Debug for T`. However, I don't know if it affects code size / performance.
`rustc_on_unimplemented` supports referring to trait
Add support to `rustc_on_unimplemented` to reference the full path of
the annotated trait. For the following code:
```rust
pub mod Bar {
#[rustc_on_unimplemented = "test error `{Self}` with `{Bar}` `{Baz}` `{Quux}` in `{Foo}`"]
pub trait Foo<Bar, Baz, Quux> {}
}
```
the error message will be:
```
test error `std::string::String` with `u8` `_` `u32` in `Bar::Foo`
```
Note different versions of same crate when absolute paths of different types match.
The current check to address #22750 only works when the paths of the mismatched types relative to the current crate are equal, but this does not always work if one of the types is only included through an indirect dependency. If reexports are involved, the indirectly included path can e.g. [contain private modules](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/22750#issuecomment-302755516).
This PR takes care of these cases by also comparing the *absolute* path, which is equal if the type hasn't moved in the module hierarchy between versions. A more coarse check would be to compare only the crate names instead of full paths, but that might lead to too many false positives.
Additionally, I believe it would be helpful to show where the differing crates came from, i.e. the information in `rustc::middle::cstore::CrateSource`, but I'm not sure yet how to nicely display all of that, so I'm leaving it to a future PR.
This still does not work on 32-bit archs because of an LLVM limitation,
but this is only an optimization, so let's push it on 64-bit only for now.
Fixes#37945
incr.comp.: Don't include span information in the ICH of type definitions
This should improve some of the `regex` tests on perf.rlo. Not including spans into the ICH is harmless until we also cache warnings. To really solve the problem, we need to do more refactoring (see #43088).
r? @nikomatsakis
Only match a fragment specifier the if it starts with certain tokens.
When trying to match a fragment specifier, we first predict whether the current token can be matched at all. If it cannot be matched, don't bother to push the Earley item to `bb_eis`. This can fix a lot of issues which otherwise requires full backtracking (#42838).
In this PR the prediction treatment is not done for `:item`, `:stmt` and `:tt`, but it could be expanded in the future.
Fixes#24189.
Fixes#26444.
Fixes#27832.
Fixes#34030.
Fixes#35650.
Fixes#39964.
Fixes the 4th comment in #40569.
Fixes the issue blocking #40984.
Fix feature gate for `#[link_args(..)]` attribute
Fix feature gate for `#[link_args(..)]` attribute so that it will fire regardless of context of attribute.
See also #29596 and #43106
Fold E0612, E0613 into E0609
As discussed in #42945, with PR 1506 tuple indices are no longer considered a separate case from normal field. This PR folds E06012 ("tuple index out of bounds") and E0613 ("type is not a tuple") into E0609 ("type does not have field with that name")
Resolves#42945
Replace the global fulfillment cache with the evaluation cache
This uses the new "Chalk" ParamEnv refactoring to check "global" predicates in an empty environment, which should be correct because global predicates aren't affected by a consistent environment.
Fixes#39970.
Fixes#42796.
r? @nikomatsakis
Check types for privacy
This PR implements late post factum checking of type privacy, as opposed to early preventive "private-in-public" checking.
This will allow to turn private-in-public checks into a lint and make them more heuristic-based, and more aligned with what people may expect (e.g. reachability-based behavior).
Types are privacy-checked if they are written explicitly, and also if they are inferred as expression or pattern types.
This PR checks "semantic" types and does it unhygienically, this significantly restricts what macros 2.0 (as implemented in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/40847) can do (sorry @jseyfried) - they still can use private *names*, but can't use private *types*.
This is the most conservative solution, but hopefully it's temporary and can be relaxed in the future, probably using macro contexts of expression/pattern spans.
Traits are also checked in preparation for [trait aliases](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41517), which will be able to leak private traits, and macros 2.0 which will be able to leak pretty much anything.
This is a [breaking-change], but the code that is not contrived and can be broken by this patch should be guarded by `private_in_public` lint. [Previous crater run](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/34537#issuecomment-262865768) discovered a few abandoned crates that weren't updated since `private_in_public` has been introduced in 2015.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/34537https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/lang-team-minutes-private-in-public-rules/4504
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/30476
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33479
cc @nikomatsakis
r? @eddyb
