rustc: Stabilize the `proc_macro` feature
This commit stabilizes some of the `proc_macro` language feature as well as a
number of APIs in the `proc_macro` crate as [previously discussed][1]. This
means that on stable Rust you can now define custom procedural macros which
operate as attributes attached to items or `macro_rules!`-like bang-style
invocations. This extends the suite of currently stable procedural macros,
custom derives, with custom attributes and custom bang macros.
Note though that despite the stabilization in this commit procedural macros are
still not usable on stable Rust. To stabilize that we'll need to stabilize at
least part of the `use_extern_macros` feature. Currently you can define a
procedural macro attribute but you can't import it to call it!
A summary of the changes made in this PR (as well as the various consequences)
is:
* The `proc_macro` language and library features are now stable.
* Other APIs not stabilized in the `proc_macro` crate are now named under a
different feature, such as `proc_macro_diagnostic` or `proc_macro_span`.
* A few checks in resolution for `proc_macro` being enabled have switched over
to `use_extern_macros` being enabled. This means that code using
`#![feature(proc_macro)]` today will likely need to move to
`#![feature(use_extern_macros)]`.
It's intended that this PR, once landed, will be followed up with an attempt to
stabilize a small slice of `use_extern_macros` just for procedural macros to
make this feature 100% usable on stable.
[1]: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/help-stabilize-a-subset-of-macros-2-0/7252
This commit stabilizes some of the `proc_macro` language feature as well as a
number of APIs in the `proc_macro` crate as [previously discussed][1]. This
means that on stable Rust you can now define custom procedural macros which
operate as attributes attached to items or `macro_rules!`-like bang-style
invocations. This extends the suite of currently stable procedural macros,
custom derives, with custom attributes and custom bang macros.
Note though that despite the stabilization in this commit procedural macros are
still not usable on stable Rust. To stabilize that we'll need to stabilize at
least part of the `use_extern_macros` feature. Currently you can define a
procedural macro attribute but you can't import it to call it!
A summary of the changes made in this PR (as well as the various consequences)
is:
* The `proc_macro` language and library features are now stable.
* Other APIs not stabilized in the `proc_macro` crate are now named under a
different feature, such as `proc_macro_diagnostic` or `proc_macro_span`.
* A few checks in resolution for `proc_macro` being enabled have switched over
to `use_extern_macros` being enabled. This means that code using
`#![feature(proc_macro)]` today will likely need to move to
`#![feature(use_extern_macros)]`.
It's intended that this PR, once landed, will be followed up with an attempt to
stabilize a small slice of `use_extern_macros` just for procedural macros to
make this feature 100% usable on stable.
[1]: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/help-stabilize-a-subset-of-macros-2-0/7252
CTFE: use binary_op to compare integer with match disriminant
This is needed to unblock https://github.com/solson/miri/pull/401: There is code in the Windows initialization functions that uses `match` to test whether a pointer is NULL.
I will add a testcase in miri; I was not sure where to add a testcase in Rust itself.
r? @oli-obk
resolve: Functions introducing procedural macros reserve a slot in the macro namespace as well
Similarly to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/52234, this gives us symmetry between internal and external views of a crate, but in this case it's always an error to call a procedural macro in the same crate in which it's defined.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/52225
rustdoc: don't panic when the cross-re-export handler sees a proc-macro
When i moved the macro cross-re-export inlining code into `clean::inline`, i thought that if a macro had a `Def` that said it was a bang macro, it wouldn't be a proc macro. I thought wrong. Turns out, the `quote!()` in `libproc_macro` is actually a proc-macro, and when the `quote!()` macro is re-exported, this proc-macro is accessed in its place. This causes any `proc_macro::*` glob re-export to pull in this proc-macro, causing the assertion i added to fire, leading to an ICE. This replaces that with an Option that ignores proc-macros for the time being.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/52129
rustc: Tweak expansion of #[proc_macro] for 2018
The syntactical expansion of `#[proc_macro]` and related attributes currently
contains absolute paths which conflicts with a lint for the 2018 edition,
causing issues like #52214. This commit puts a band-aid on the issue by ensuring
that procedural macros can also migrate to the 2018 edition for now by tweaking
the expansion based on what features are activated. A more long-term solution
would probably tweak the edition hygiene of spans, but this should do the trick
for now.
Closes#52214
Don't display default generic parameters in diagnostics that compare types
In errors like:
```
expected type: `RawVec<foo, Global>`
found type: `foo`
```
`RawVec` being defined as `RawVec<T, A: Alloc = Global>`, the error is better written as
```
expected type: `RawVec<foo>`
found type: `foo`
```
In fact, that is already what happens when `foo` is not an ADT, because in that case, the diagnostic handler doesn't try to highlight something, and just uses the `Display` trait instead of its own logic.
e.g.
```
expected type: `RawVec<usize>`
found type: `usize`
```
Add the `amdgpu-kernel` ABI.
Technically, there are requirements imposed by the LLVM
`AMDGPUTargetMachine` on functions with this ABI (eg, the return type
must be void), but I'm unsure exactly where this should be enforced.
Technically, there are requirements imposed by the LLVM
`AMDGPUTargetMachine` on functions with this ABI (eg, the return type
must be void), but I'm unsure exactly where this should be enforced.
Preliminary work for incremental ThinLTO.
Since implementing incremental ThinLTO is a bit more involved than I initially thought, I'm splitting out some of the things that already work. This PR (1) adds a way accessing some ThinLTO information in `rustc` and (2) does some cleanup around CGU/object file naming (which makes things quite a bit nicer).
This is probably best reviewed one commit at a time.
Don't silently ignore invalid data in target spec
This is technically a breaking change, but only because invalid data was previously silently being ignored.
NLL: Suggest `ref mut` and `&mut self`
Fixes#51244. Supersedes #51249, I think.
Under the old lexical lifetimes, the compiler provided helpful suggestions about adding `mut` when you tried to mutate a variable bound as `&self` or (explicit) `ref`. NLL doesn't have those suggestions yet. This pull request adds them.
I didn't bother making the help text exactly the same as without NLL, but I can if that's important.
(Originally this was supposed to be part of #51612, but I got bogged down trying to fit everything in one PR.)
