Loosened rules involving statics mentioning other statics
Before this PR, trying to mention a static in any way other than taking a reference to it caused a compile-time error. So, while
```rust
static A: u32 = 42;
static B: &u32 = &A;
```
compiles successfully,
```rust
static A: u32 = 42;
static B: u32 = A; // error
```
and
```rust
static A: u32 = 42;
static B: u32 = *&A; // error
```
are not possible to express in Rust. On the other hand, introducing an intermediate `const fn` can presently allow one to do just that:
```rust
static A: u32 = 42;
static B: u32 = foo(&A); // success!
const fn foo(a: &u32) -> u32 {
*a
}
```
Preventing `const fn` from allowing to work around the ban on reading from statics would cripple `const fn` almost into uselessness.
Additionally, the limitation for reading from statics comes from the old const evaluator(s) and is not shared by `miri`.
This PR loosens the rules around use of statics to allow statics to evaluate other statics by value, allowing all of the above examples to compile and run successfully.
Reads from extern (foreign) statics are however still disallowed by miri, because there is no compile-time value to be read.
```rust
extern static A: u32;
static B: u32 = A; // error
```
This opens up a new avenue of potential issues, as a static can now not just refer to other statics or read from other statics, but even contain references that point into itself.
While it might seem like this could cause subtle bugs like allowing a static to be initialized by its own value, this is inherently impossible in miri.
Reading from a static causes the `const_eval` query for that static to be invoked. Calling the `const_eval` query for a static while already inside the `const_eval` query of said static will cause cycle errors.
It is not possible to accidentally create a bug in miri that would enable initializing a static with itself, because the memory of the static *does not exist* while being initialized.
The memory is not uninitialized, it is not there. Thus any change that would accidentally allow reading from a not yet initialized static would cause ICEs.
Tests have been modified according to the new rules, and new tests have been added for writing to `static mut`s within definitions of statics (which needs to fail), and incremental compilation with complex/interlinking static definitions.
Note that incremental compilation did not need to be adjusted, because all of this was already possible before with workarounds (like intermediate `const fn`s) and the encoding/decoding already supports all the possible cases.
r? @eddyb
Speed up compilation of large constant arrays
This is a different approach to #51672 as suggested by @oli-obk. Rather
than write each repeated value one-by-one, we write the first one and
then copy its value directly into the remaining memory.
With this change, the [toy program](c2f4744d2d/src/test/run-pass/mir_heavy_promoted.rs) goes from 63 seconds to 19 seconds on my machine.
Edit: Inlining `Size::bytes()` saves an additional 6 seconds dropping the total time to 13 seconds on my machine.
Edit2: Now down to 2.8 seconds.
r? @oli-obk
cc @nnethercote @eddyb
Do not allow LLVM to increase a TLS's alignment on macOS.
This addresses the various TLS segfault on macOS 10.10.
Fix#51794.
Fix#51758.
Fix#50867.
Fix#48866.
Fix#46355.
Fix#44056.
Add a compiletest header for edition
r? @nikomatsakis
Are the `-Zunstable-options` options needed in these tests? It looks like they aren't. If not, I can remove them.
`Self` in where clauses may not be object safe
Needs crater, virtually certain to cause regressions.
In #50781 it was discovered that our object safety rules are not sound because we allow `Self` in where clauses without restrain. This PR is a direct fix to the rules so that we disallow methods with unsound where clauses.
This currently uses hard error to measure impact, but we will want to downgrade it to a future compat error.
Part of #50781.
r? @nikomatsakis
This is virtually certain to cause regressions, needs crater.
In #50781 it was discovered that our object safety rules are not sound because we allow `Self` in where clauses without restrain. This PR is a direct fix to the rules so that we disallow methods with unsound where clauses.
This currently uses hard error to measure impact, but we will want to downgrade it to a future compat error.
Fixes#50781.
r? @nikomatsakis
The acronym is not descriptive unless one has seen it before.
* Rename the `oom` function to `handle_alloc_error`. It was **stabilized in 1.28**, so if we do this at all we need to land it this cycle.
* Rename `set_oom_hook` to `set_alloc_error_hook`
* Rename `take_oom_hook` to `take_alloc_error_hook`
Bikeshed: `alloc` v.s. `allocator`, `error` v.s. `failure`
Add existential type definitions
Note: this does not allow creating named existential types, it just desugars `impl Trait` to a less (but still very) hacky version of actual `existential type` items.
r? @nikomatsakis
Implement RFC 2421, 'Keyword unreservations (pure, sizeof, alignof, offsetof)
On my local machine I was getting failures in `test/ui-fulldeps`, but I was also getting them again after reverting the change, so I'm hoping that this works.
I removed the test because that's what the other PR that unreserved a keyword did and I feel that it doesn't make sense/keep value to keep a test for something removed years ago.
Dedup auto traits in trait objects.
Fixes#47010
Note that the test file `run-pass/trait-object-auto-dedup.rs` passes before and after this change. It's the `ui` test that changed from compiling to not compiling. Which does make this a breaking change, but I cannot imagine anybody actually being broken by it.
Add Future and task system to the standard library
This adds preliminary versions of the `std::future` and `std::task` modules in order to unblock development of async/await (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/50547). These shouldn't be considered as final forms of these libraries-- design questions about the libraries should be left on https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2418. Once that RFC (or a successor) is merged, these APIs will be adjusted as necessary.
r? @aturon
