Fix `unwrap_or_else_default` false positive
This PR fixes a false positive in the handling of `unwrap_or_else` with a default value when the value is needed for type inference.
An easy example to exhibit the false positive is the following:
```rust
let option = None;
option.unwrap_or_else(Vec::new).push(1);
```
The following code would not compile, because the fact that the value is a `Vec` has been lost:
```rust
let option = None;
option.unwrap_or_default().push(1);
```
The fix is to:
- implement a heuristic to tell whether an expression's type can be determined purely from its subexpressions, and the arguments and locals they use;
- apply the heuristic to `unwrap_or_else`'s receiver.
The heuristic returns false when applied to `option` in the above example, but it returns true when applied to `option` in either of the following examples:
```rust
let option: Option<Vec<u64>> = None;
option.unwrap_or_else(Vec::new).push(1);
```
```rust
let option = None::<Vec<u64>>;
option.unwrap_or_else(Vec::new).push(1);
```
(Aside: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/10120 unfairly contained multiple changes in one PR. I am trying to break that PR up into smaller pieces.)
---
changelog: FP: [`unwrap_or_else_default`]: No longer lints if the default value is needed for type inference
Remove `#![allow(unused)]` and `--crate-name` from `cargo dev new_lint` generated tests
changelog: none
Also removes some unused flags from `ui-cargo` tests because the entrypoint is now the `Cargo.toml`, not the `.rs` files
Reasoning: if the stack is empty, the loop will be infinite,
so the assumption is that the stack can't be non empty. Unwrap
makes the assumption more clear (and removes an indentation level)
New lint [`iter_skip_zero`]
Idea came from my contribution to `unnecessary_cast` recently. Sorry about that 😅
Could be an issue if somebody manually implements `skip`, but I don't think anybody will (and this would be an issue with other lints too, afaik)
changelog: New lint [`iter_skip_zero`]
Consider `()` within types to be FFI-safe, and `()` to be FFI-safe as a
return type (incl. when in a transparent newtype).
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david@davidtw.co>
`()` is normally FFI-unsafe, but is FFI-safe when used as a return type.
It is also desirable that a transparent newtype for `()` is FFI-safe when
used as a return type.
In order to support this, when an type was deemed FFI-unsafe, because of
a `()` type, and was used in return type - then the type was considered
FFI-safe. However, this was the wrong approach - it didn't check that the
`()` was part of a transparent newtype! The consequence of this is that
the presence of a `()` type in a more complex return type would make it
the entire type be considered safe (as long as the `()` type was the
first that the lint found) - which is obviously incorrect.
Instead, this logic is removed, and a unit return type or a transparent
wrapper around a unit is checked for directly for functions and fn-ptrs.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david@davidtw.co>
Better diagnostics for dlltool errors.
When dlltool fails, show the full command that was executed. In particular, llvm-dlltool is not very helpful, printing a generic usage message rather than what actually went wrong, so stdout and stderr aren't of much use when troubleshooting.
New lint [`string_lit_chars_any`]
Closes#10389
This lint can probably be deprecated if/when rustc optimizes `.chars().any(...)`.
changelog: New lint [`string_lit_chars_any`]
allow opaques to be defined by trait queries, again
This basically reverts #112963.
Moreover, all call-sites of `enter_canonical_trait_query` can now define opaque types, see the ui test `defined-by-user-annotation.rs`.
Fixes#113689
r? `@compiler-errors` `@oli-obk`
Instead of repeatedly merging the two smallest CGUs, we now use a
merging algorithm that aims to minimize the duplication of inlined
functions.
`exa-0.10.1` was one benchmark that saw particularly good results. The
old CGU stats:
```
INTERNALIZE
- unique items: 2774 (1216 root + 1558 inlined), unique size: 122065 (77219 root + 44846 inlined)
- placed items: 3834 (1216 root + 2618 inlined), placed size: 154552 (77219 root + 77333 inlined)
- placed/unique items ratio: 1.38, placed/unique size ratio: 1.27
- CGUs: 16, mean size: 9659.5, sizes: [11791, 11634, 11173, 10987, 10939, 10507, 9992, 9813, 9593, 9580, 9030, 8447, 7975, 7961, 7876, 7254]
```
The new CGU stats:
```
INTERNALIZE
- unique items: 2774 (1216 root + 1558 inlined), unique size: 122065 (77219 root + 44846 inlined)
- placed items: 3626 (1216 root + 2410 inlined), placed size: 147201 (77219 root + 69982 inlined)
- placed/unique items ratio: 1.31, placed/unique size ratio: 1.21
- CGUs: 16, mean size: 9200.1, sizes: [11634, 10939, 10227, 9555, 9178, 9167, 8879, 8804, 8604, 8603 (x3), 8602 (x2), 8601, 8600]
```
The difference is in the number of inlined items. There are 1558 unique
inlined items. With the old algorithm these were placed 2618 times,
resulting in 1060 duplicates. With the new algorithm these were placed
2410 times, resulting in 852 duplicates. Also, the mean CGU size dropped
from 9659.5 to 9200.1, and the CGU size distribution tightened, with the
biggest one a little smaller and the smallest ones a little bigger.
Restrict recursive opaque type check
We have a recursive opaque check in writeback to avoid inferring the hidden of an opaque type to be itself:
33a2c2487a/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/writeback.rs (L556-L575)
Issue #113619 treats `make_option2` as not defining the TAIT `TestImpl` since it is inferred to have the definition `TestImpl := B<TestImpl>`, which fails this check. This regressed in #102700 (5d15beb591), I think due to the refactoring that made us record the hidden types of TAITs during writeback.
However, nothing actually seems to go bad if we relax this recursion checker to only check for directly recursive definitions. This PR fixes#113619 by changing this recursive check from being a visitor to just checking that the hidden type is exactly the same as the opaque being inferred.
Alternatively, we may be able to fix#113619 by restricting this recursion check only to RPITs/async fns. It seems to only be possible to use misuse the recursion check to cause ICEs for TAITs (though I didn't try too hard to create a bad RPIT example... may be possible, actually.)
r? `@oli-obk`
--
Fixes#113314
Fix removal span calculation of `unused_qualifications` suggestion
Given a path such as `std::ops::Index<str>`, calculate the unnecessary qualification removal span by computing the beginning of the entire span until the ident span of the last path segment, which handles generic arguments and lifetime arguments in the last path segment. Previous logic only kept the ident span of the last path segment which is incorrect.
Closes#113808.
