`tests/ui/issues/`: The Issues Strike Back [2/N]
Some `tests/ui/issues/` housekeeping, to trim down number of tests directly under `tests/ui/issues/`. Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133895.
r? ``@jieyouxu``
Adds the equivalent `nonpoison` types to the `poison::mutex` module.
These types and implementations are gated under the `nonpoison_mutex`
feature gate.
Also blesses the ui tests that now have a name conflicts (because these
types no longer have unique names). The full path distinguishes the
different types.
Co-authored-by: Aandreba <aandreba@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Trevor Gross <tmgross@umich.edu>
`tests/ui/issues/`: The Issues Strike Back [1/N]
I believe I’ve finally brought [my program](https://github.com/Kivooeo/test-manager) to life -- it now handles multiple test moves in one go: plain moves first, then a gentle touch on each file depends on given options. The process should be much smoother now.
Of course, I won’t rush through everything in a few days -- that would be unkind to `@Oneirical.` I’ll pace myself. And also I can't have more than one such PR because `issues.txt` will conflict with previous parts after merging them which is not fun as well.
This PR is just that: first commit - moves; second - regression comments and the occasional .stderr reblesses, also issue.txt and tidy changes. Nothing special, but progress nonetheless. This is for the purpose of preserving test file history during restructuring
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133895.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Add more test case to check if the false note related to sealed trait suppressed
Closesrust-lang/rust#143121
I started to fix the issue but I found that this one has already been addressed in this PR (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143431). I added an additional test to prove the reported thing has been resolved just in case.
I think we can discard this pull request if there's no need to add such kind of tests👍🏻
Use relative visibility when noting sealed trait to reduce false positive
Fixesrust-lang/rust#143392
I used relative visibility instead of just determining if it's public or not.
r? compiler
`tests/ui`: A New Order [4/N]
> [!NOTE]
>
> Intermediate commits are intended to help review, but will be squashed prior to merge.
r? ``@jieyouxu``
added stderr tag for commit which means it included generated stderr
Run wfcheck in one big loop instead of per module
Maybe we can merge this big loop in the future with the `par_hir_body_owners` call below and run typeck only on items that didn't fail wfcheck. For now let's just see if perf likes it, as it by itself should be beneficial to parallel rustc
Note potential but private items in show_candidates
Closes#138626 .
We should add potential private items to give ample hints.
And for the other seemingly false positive ` pub use crate:1️⃣:Foo;` should be kept because we don't know if the user wants to import other module's items or not, and therefore should be given the full option to do so.
r? compiler
Currently, marking a dependency private does not automatically make all
its child dependencies private. Resolve this by making its children
private by default as well.
This also resolves some FIXMEs for tests that are intended to fail but
previously passed.
[1]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135501#issuecomment-2620242419
```
error[E0610]: `{integer}` is a primitive type and therefore doesn't have fields
--> $DIR/attempted-access-non-fatal.rs:7:15
|
LL | let _ = 2.l;
| ^
|
help: if intended to be a floating point literal, consider adding a `0` after the period and a `f64` suffix
|
LL - let _ = 2.l;
LL + let _ = 2.0f64;
|
```
```
error[E0432]: unresolved import `some_novel_crate`
--> file.rs:1:5
|
1 | use some_novel_crate::Type;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ use of unresolved module or unlinked crate `some_novel_crate`
```
On resolve errors where there might be a missing crate, mention `cargo add foo`:
```
error[E0433]: failed to resolve: use of unresolved module or unlinked crate `nope`
--> $DIR/conflicting-impl-with-err.rs:4:11
|
LL | impl From<nope::Thing> for Error {
| ^^^^ use of unresolved module or unlinked crate `nope`
|
= help: if you wanted to use a crate named `nope`, use `cargo add nope` to add it to your `Cargo.toml`
```
remove support for the (unstable) #[start] attribute
As explained by `@Noratrieb:`
`#[start]` should be deleted. It's nothing but an accidentally leaked implementation detail that's a not very useful mix between "portable" entrypoint logic and bad abstraction.
I think the way the stable user-facing entrypoint should work (and works today on stable) is pretty simple:
- `std`-using cross-platform programs should use `fn main()`. the compiler, together with `std`, will then ensure that code ends up at `main` (by having a platform-specific entrypoint that gets directed through `lang_start` in `std` to `main` - but that's just an implementation detail)
- `no_std` platform-specific programs should use `#![no_main]` and define their own platform-specific entrypoint symbol with `#[no_mangle]`, like `main`, `_start`, `WinMain` or `my_embedded_platform_wants_to_start_here`. most of them only support a single platform anyways, and need cfg for the different platform's ways of passing arguments or other things *anyways*
`#[start]` is in a super weird position of being neither of those two. It tries to pretend that it's cross-platform, but its signature is a total lie. Those arguments are just stubbed out to zero on ~~Windows~~ wasm, for example. It also only handles the platform-specific entrypoints for a few platforms that are supported by `std`, like Windows or Unix-likes. `my_embedded_platform_wants_to_start_here` can't use it, and neither could a libc-less Linux program.
So we have an attribute that only works in some cases anyways, that has a signature that's a total lie (and a signature that, as I might want to add, has changed recently, and that I definitely would not be comfortable giving *any* stability guarantees on), and where there's a pretty easy way to get things working without it in the first place.
Note that this feature has **not** been RFCed in the first place.
*This comment was posted [in May](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29633#issuecomment-2088596042) and so far nobody spoke up in that issue with a usecase that would require keeping the attribute.*
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29633
try-job: x86_64-gnu-nopt
try-job: x86_64-msvc-1
try-job: x86_64-msvc-2
try-job: test-various
