Commit graph

1507 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
bors
fb44b4c0eb Auto merge of #48171 - FraGag:doc-copy-clone-impls, r=nikomatsakis
Better document the implementors of Clone and Copy

There are two parts to this change. The first part is a change to the compiler and to the standard library (specifically, libcore) to allow implementations of `Clone` and `Copy` to be written for a subset of builtin types. By adding these implementations to libcore, they now show up in the documentation. This is a [breaking-change] for users of `#![no_core]`, because they will now have to supply their own copy of the implementations of `Clone` and `Copy` that were added in libcore.

The second part is purely a documentation change to document the other implementors of `Clone` and `Copy` that cannot be described in Rust code (yet) and are thus provided by the compiler.

Fixes #25893
2018-04-04 18:11:51 +00:00
bors
199b7e211d Auto merge of #48333 - aidanhs:aphs-no-place-for-placement, r=nikomatsakis
Remove all unstable placement features

Closes #22181, #27779. Effectively makes the assortment of placement RFCs (rust-lang/rfcs#470, rust-lang/rfcs#809, rust-lang/rfcs#1228) 'unaccepted'. It leaves `box_syntax` and keeps the `<-` token as recognised by libsyntax.

------------------------

I don't know the correct process for unaccepting an unstable feature that was accepted as an RFC so...here's a PR.

Let me preface this by saying I'm not particularly happy about doing this (I know it'll be unpopular), but I think it's the most honest expression of how things stand today. I've been motivated by a [post on reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/7wrqk2/when_will_box_and_placementin_syntax_be_stable/) which asks when these features will be stable - the features have received little RFC-style design work since the end of 2015 (~2 years ago) and leaving them in limbo confuses people who want to know where they're up to. Without additional design work that needs to happen (see the collection of unresolved questions later in this post) they can't really get stabilised, and I think that design work would be most suited to an RFC rather than (currently mostly unused) experimental features in Rust nightly.

I have my own motivations - it's very simple to 'defeat' placement in debug mode today and I don't want a placement in Rust that a) has no guarantees to work and b) has no plan for in-place serde deserialisation.

There's a quote in [1]: "Ordinarily these uncertainties might lead to the RFC being postponed. [The RFC seems like a promising direction hence we will accept since it] will thus give us immediate experience with the design and help in determining the best final solution.". I propose that there have been enough additional uncertainties raised since then that the original direction is less promising and we should be think about the problem anew.

(a historical note: the first mention of placement (under that name - uninit pointers were earlier) in an RFC AFAIK is [0] in late 2014 (pre-1.0). RFCs since then have built on this base - [1] is a comment in Feb 2015 accepting a more conservative design of the Place* traits - this is back when serde still required aster and seemed to break every other nightly! A lot has changed since then, perhaps placement should too)

------------------------

Concrete unresolved questions include:

 - making placement work in debug mode [7]
 - making placement work for serde/with fallible creation [5], [irlo2], [8]
 - trait design:
   - opting into not consuming the placer in `Placer::make_place` - [2]
   - trait proliferation - [4] (+ others in that thread)
   - fallible allocation - [3], [4] (+ others in that thread)
 - support for DSTs/unsized structs (if at all) - [1], [6]

More speculative unresolved questions include:

 - better trait design with in the context of future language features [irlo1] (Q11), [irlo3]
 - interaction between custom allocators and placement [irlo3]

[0] https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/470
[1] https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/809#issuecomment-73910414
[2] https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1286
[3] https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1315
[4] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27779#issuecomment-146711893
[5] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27779#issuecomment-285562402
[6] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27779#issuecomment-354464938
[7] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27779#issuecomment-358025344
[8] https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1228#issuecomment-190825370
[irlo1] https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/placement-nwbi-faq-new-box-in-left-arrow/2789
[irlo2] https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/placement-nwbi-faq-new-box-in-left-arrow/2789/19
[irlo3] https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/lang-team-minutes-feature-status-report-placement-in-and-box/4646
2018-04-04 01:06:35 +00:00
bors
b12af86a77 Auto merge of #49348 - bobtwinkles:extend_2pb, r=nikomatsakis
Extend two-phase borrows to apply to method receiver autorefs

Fixes #48598 by permitting two-phase borrows on the autorefs created when functions and methods.
2018-04-03 09:11:35 +00:00
Aidan Hobson Sayers
9b5859aea1 Remove all unstable placement features
Closes #22181, #27779
2018-04-03 11:02:34 +02:00
Austin Bonander
7c0124dd35 Expand attribute macros on statements and expressions.
Retains the `stmt_expr_attributes` feature requirement for attributes on expressions.

closes #41475
cc #38356
2018-04-02 01:56:12 -07:00
bors
a6f1c6a3ee Auto merge of #49425 - alexcrichton:disallow-inline-always, r=petrochenkov
rustc: Forbid #[inline(always)] with #[target_feature]

Once a target feature is enabled for a function that means that it in general
can't be inlined into other functions which don't have that target feature
enabled. This can cause both safety and LLVM issues if we were to actually
inline it, so `#[inline(always)]` both can't be respected and would be an error
if we did so!

Today LLVM doesn't inline functions with different `#[target_feature]`
annotations, but it turns out that if one is tagged with `#[inline(always)]`
it'll override this and cause scary LLVM error to arise!

This commit fixes this issue by forbidding these two attributes to be used in
conjunction with one another.

Closes rust-lang-nursery/stdsimd#404
2018-03-30 14:11:35 +00:00
kennytm
d06abdbfd8
Rollup merge of #49446 - frewsxcv:frewsxcv-mention-optiono, r=GuillaumeGomez
Explicitly mention `Option` in `?` error message.

Save users the time/effort of having to lookup what types implement
the `Try` trait.
2018-03-30 01:31:13 +02:00
Taylor Cramer
e6e6bd27d5 Stabilize underscore lifetimes 2018-03-29 00:27:50 +02:00
Corey Farwell
1f143bc46f Explicitly mention Option in ? error message.
Save users the time/effort of having to lookup what types implement
the `Try` trait.
2018-03-28 13:04:44 +02:00
Taylor Cramer
3c65f53620 Stabilize match_default_bindings
This includes a submodule update to rustfmt
in order to allow a stable feature declaration.
2018-03-28 11:13:13 +02:00
Alex Crichton
38d48ef537 rustc: Forbid #[inline(always)] with #[target_feature]
Once a target feature is enabled for a function that means that it in general
can't be inlined into other functions which don't have that target feature
enabled. This can cause both safety and LLVM issues if we were to actually
inline it, so `#[inline(always)]` both can't be respected and would be an error
if we did so!

Today LLVM doesn't inline functions with different `#[target_feature]`
annotations, but it turns out that if one is tagged with `#[inline(always)]`
it'll override this and cause scary LLVM error to arise!

This commit fixes this issue by forbidding these two attributes to be used in
conjunction with one another.

cc rust-lang-nursery/stdsimd#404
2018-03-27 14:38:20 -07:00
kennytm
605ea7c31f
Rollup merge of #49426 - lukaslueg:patch-1, r=kennytm
Update CONTRIBUTING.md

The current link is a 404, just link to the main repo page
2018-03-28 03:03:39 +08:00
kennytm
3d910b8dc1
Rollup merge of #49223 - GuillaumeGomez:propose-variant-for-E0599, r=cramertj
Propose a variant if it is an enum for E0599

Fixes #49192.
2018-03-27 10:47:46 +02:00
Francis Gagné
27164faaef Move some implementations of Clone and Copy to libcore
Add implementations of `Clone` and `Copy` for some primitive types to
libcore so that they show up in the documentation. The concerned types
are the following:

* All primitive signed and unsigned integer types (`usize`, `u8`, `u16`,
  `u32`, `u64`, `u128`, `isize`, `i8`, `i16`, `i32`, `i64`, `i128`);
* All primitive floating point types (`f32`, `f64`)
* `bool`
* `char`
* `!`
* Raw pointers (`*const T` and `*mut T`)
* Shared references (`&'a T`)

These types already implemented `Clone` and `Copy`, but the
implementation was provided by the compiler. The compiler no longer
provides these implementations and instead tries to look them up as
normal trait implementations. The goal of this change is to make the
implementations appear in the generated documentation.

For `Copy` specifically, the compiler would reject an attempt to write
an `impl` for the primitive types listed above with error `E0206`; this
error no longer occurs for these types, but it will still occur for the
other types that used to raise that error.

The trait implementations are guarded with `#[cfg(not(stage0))]` because
they are invalid according to the stage0 compiler. When the stage0
compiler is updated to a revision that includes this change, the
attribute will have to be removed, otherwise the stage0 build will fail
because the types mentioned above no longer implement `Clone` or `Copy`.

For type variants that are variadic, such as tuples and function
pointers, and for array types, the `Clone` and `Copy` implementations
are still provided by the compiler, because the language is not
expressive enough yet to be able to write the appropriate
implementations in Rust.

The initial plan was to add `impl` blocks guarded by `#[cfg(dox)]` to
make them apply only when generating documentation, without having to
touch the compiler. However, rustdoc's usage of the compiler still
rejected those `impl` blocks.

This is a [breaking-change] for users of `#![no_core]`, because they
will now have to supply their own implementations of `Clone` and `Copy`
for the primitive types listed above. The easiest way to do that is to
simply copy the implementations from `src/libcore/clone.rs` and
`src/libcore/marker.rs`.

Fixes #25893
2018-03-26 21:52:58 -04:00
Simon Sapin
e53a2a7274 Stabilize the TryFrom and TryInto traits
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33417
2018-03-26 23:36:02 +02:00
Mark Mansi
afc9890309 Fix e0658 ui test 2018-03-26 08:37:56 -05:00
Mark Mansi
1fd964b5cb update test 2018-03-26 08:37:56 -05:00
Mark Mansi
07104692d5 Fix missed i128 feature gates 2018-03-26 08:37:56 -05:00
Mark Mansi
db7d9ea480 Stabilize i128 feature too 2018-03-26 08:37:56 -05:00
Mark Mansi
7ce8191775 Stabilize i128_type 2018-03-26 08:36:50 -05:00
bors
5e4603f990 Auto merge of #49255 - cramertj:stable-impl-trait, r=nikomatsakis
Stabilize impl Trait

Blocked on:

- [x] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/49041 and
- [ ] completion of FCP in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/34511#issuecomment-373207183 (3 days from now).

I have not yet done any docs work for this-- I probably won't get to it until this weekend (might be a project for the flight to the all-hands).
2018-03-26 09:14:23 +00:00
Taylor Cramer
0f5b52e4a8 Stabilize conservative_impl_trait 2018-03-26 10:43:03 +02:00
Taylor Cramer
c393db67ba Stabilize universal_impl_trait 2018-03-26 07:39:38 +02:00
Alexander Ronald Altman
9e6991ce49 Modify tests 2018-03-25 01:29:57 -05:00
bobtwinkles
d37a7ab32b Extend two-phase borrows to apply to method receiver autorefs
This is required to compile things like

src/test/ui/borrowck/two-phase-method-receivers.rs
2018-03-24 22:00:38 -04:00
kennytm
297a6e580d
Rollup merge of #49299 - SimonSapin:ubiquity, r=nikomatsakis
Stabilize the copy_closures and clone_closures features

In addition to the `Fn*` family of traits, closures now implement `Copy` (and similarly `Clone`) if all of the captures do.

Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44490
2018-03-25 01:30:12 +08:00
kennytm
3bc81f7f4d
Rollup merge of #49268 - ordovicia:dotdot-pattern-diag, r=petrochenkov
Better diagnostics for '..' pattern fragment not in the last position

Fixes #49257.
2018-03-25 01:26:40 +08:00
kennytm
e2b89221f1
Rollup merge of #49194 - Zoxc:unsafe-generator, r=cramertj
Make resuming generators unsafe instead of the creation of immovable generators

cc @withoutboats

Fixes #47787
2018-03-25 01:26:34 +08:00
kennytm
8d57071cbb
Rollup merge of #49162 - tmandry:stabilize-termination-trait, r=nikomatsakis
Stabilize termination_trait, split out termination_trait_test

For #48453.

First time contribution, so I'd really appreciate any feedback on how this PR can be better.

Not sure exactly what kind of documentation update is needed. If there is no PR to update the reference, I can try doing that this week as I have time.
2018-03-25 01:26:32 +08:00
kennytm
9c5f372a9a
Rollup merge of #49046 - Zoxc:error-summary, r=michaelwoerister
Always print `aborting due to n previous error(s)`

r? @michaelwoerister
2018-03-25 01:26:24 +08:00
bors
b4aa80dd73 Auto merge of #49251 - nikomatsakis:issue-15872-elision-impl-header, r=cramertj
support elision in impl headers

You can now do things like:

```
impl MyTrait<'_> for &u32 { ... }
```

Each `'_` or elided lifetime is a fresh parameter. `'_` and elision are still not permitted in associated type values. (Plausibly we could support that if there is a single input lifetime.) The original lifetime elision RFC was a bit unclear on this point: [as documented here, I think this is the correct interpretation, both because it fits existing impls and it's most analogous to the behavior in fns](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/15872#issuecomment-338700138).

We do not support elision with deprecated forms:

```
impl MyTrait for std::cell::Ref<u32> { } // ERROR
```

Builds on the in-band lifetime stuff.

r? @cramertj

Fixes #15872
2018-03-24 13:23:17 +00:00
bors
a0b0f5fba5 Auto merge of #48552 - kennytm:lower-unstable-priority, r=nikomatsakis
Lower the priority of unstable methods when picking a candidate.

Previously, when searching for the impl of a method, we do not consider the stability of the impl. This leads to lots of insta-inference-regressions due to method ambiguity when a popular name is chosen. This has happened multiple times in Rust's history e.g.

* `f64::from_bits` #40470
* `Ord::{min, max}` #42496
* `Ord::clamp` #44095 (eventually got reverted due to these breakages)
* `Iterator::flatten` #48115 (recently added)

This PR changes the probing order so that unstable items are considered last. If a stable item is found, the unstable items will not be considered (but a future-incompatible warning will still be emitted), thus allowing stable code continue to function without using qualified names.

Once the unstable feature is stabilized, the ambiguity error will still be emitted, but the user can also use newly stable std methods, while the current situation is that downstream user is forced to update the code without any immediate benefit.

(I hope that we could bring back `Ord::clamp` if this PR is merged.)
2018-03-24 04:43:24 +00:00
bors
ab0ef145ac Auto merge of #48482 - davidtwco:issue-47184, r=nikomatsakis
NLL should identify and respect the lifetime annotations that the user wrote

Part of #47184.

r? @nikomatsakis
2018-03-24 02:08:22 +00:00
Hidehito Yabuuchi
3d0ccb2a22 Fix test for PR #49268 2018-03-24 08:10:51 +09:00
kennytm
db4f3f93bc
Filed a proper tracking issue. 2018-03-24 07:02:35 +08:00
kennytm
28b2bba585
Specialize future-incompatibility warning for UNSTABLE_NAME_COLLISION. 2018-03-24 07:00:48 +08:00
kennytm
abf4d8babf
When picking a candidate, consider the unstable ones last.
If there is potential ambiguity after stabilizing those candidates, a
warning will be emitted.
2018-03-24 06:58:01 +08:00
kennytm
1731bf8049
Provide a proper span when demanding for the return type of box x. 2018-03-24 06:55:06 +08:00
Hidehito Yabuuchi
f8fc5c0523 Fix error annotations in test 2018-03-24 07:54:20 +09:00
Hidehito Yabuuchi
3bfed9e43f Better diagnostics for '..' pattern fragment not in the last position 2018-03-24 07:54:20 +09:00
Alex Crichton
3ebe12eb3e Merge branch '49001_epoch' of https://github.com/klnusbaum/rust into rollup 2018-03-23 10:16:42 -07:00
Alex Crichton
82bb41bdab Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/Lymia/rust into rollup 2018-03-23 10:16:40 -07:00
Alex Crichton
d58abe75bb Rollup merge of #49295 - csmoe:nll_test_48238, r=alexcrichton
Add test for issue-48238

Fixes #48238
test case made from comments in #48238
2018-03-23 10:16:11 -07:00
Alex Crichton
6fd3cc585a Rollup merge of #49262 - oli-obk:fixed_size_array_len, r=estebank
Produce nice array lengths on a best effort basis

fixes #49208

r? @estebank
2018-03-23 10:16:10 -07:00
Alex Crichton
401a93096d Rollup merge of #49160 - estebank:issue-47457-missing-fields, r=oli-obk
Reduce the diagnostic spam when multiple fields are missing in pattern

Fix #47457.
2018-03-23 10:16:10 -07:00
Alex Crichton
7c0c7ef330 Rollup merge of #48909 - RalfJung:type_alias_bounds, r=petrochenkov
Improve lint for type alias bounds

First of all, I learned just today that I was wrong assuming that the bounds in type aliases are entirely ignored: It turns out they are used to resolve associated types in type aliases. So:
```rust
type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; // compiles
type T2<U> = U::Assoc; // fails
type T3<U> = <U as Bound>::Assoc; // "correct" way to write this, maybe?
```
I am sorry for creating this mess.

This PR changes the wording of the lint accordingly. Moreover, since just removing the bound is no longer always a possible fix, I tried to detect cases like `T1` above and show a helpful message to the user:
```
warning: bounds on generic parameters are not enforced in type aliases
  --> $DIR/type-alias-bounds.rs:57:12
   |
LL | type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; //~ WARN not enforced in type aliases
   |            ^^^^^
   |
   = help: the bound will not be checked when the type alias is used, and should be removed
help: use absolute paths (i.e., <T as Trait>::Assoc) to refer to associated types in type aliases
  --> $DIR/type-alias-bounds.rs:57:21
   |
LL | type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; //~ WARN not enforced in type aliases
   |                     ^^^^^^^^
```
I am not sure if I got this entirely right. Ideally, we could provide a suggestion involving the correct trait and type name -- however, while I have access to the HIR in the lint, I do not know how to get access to the resolved name information, like which trait `Assoc` belongs to above. The lint does not even run if that resolution fails, so I assume that information is available *somewhere*...

This is a follow-up for (parts of) https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/48326. Also see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/21903.

This changes the name of a lint, but that lint was just merged to master yesterday and has never even been on beta.
2018-03-23 10:16:08 -07:00
Alex Crichton
f836ae48e6 Rollup merge of #48883 - alexcrichton:wasm-custom-sections, r=nikomatsakis
rustc: Add a `#[wasm_custom_section]` attribute

This commit is an implementation of adding custom sections to wasm artifacts in
rustc. The intention here is to expose the ability of the wasm binary format to
contain custom sections with arbitrary user-defined data. Currently neither our
version of LLVM nor LLD supports this so the implementation is currently custom
to rustc itself.

The implementation here is to attach a `#[wasm_custom_section = "foo"]`
attribute to any `const` which has a type like `[u8; N]`. Other types of
constants aren't supported yet but may be added one day! This should hopefully
be enough to get off the ground with *some* custom section support.

The current semantics are that any constant tagged with `#[wasm_custom_section]`
section will be *appended* to the corresponding section in the final output wasm
artifact (and this affects dependencies linked in as well, not just the final
crate). This means that whatever is interpreting the contents must be able to
interpret binary-concatenated sections (or each constant needs to be in its own
custom section).

To test this change the existing `run-make` test suite was moved to a
`run-make-fulldeps` folder and a new `run-make` test suite was added which
applies to all targets by default. This test suite currently only has one test
which only runs for the wasm target (using a node.js script to use `WebAssembly`
in JS to parse the wasm output).
2018-03-23 10:16:07 -07:00
Alex Crichton
7cf4cb5a7b
Rollup merge of #48265 - SimonSapin:nonzero, r=KodrAus
Add 12 num::NonZero* types for primitive integers, deprecate core::nonzero

RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2307
Tracking issue: ~~https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27730~~ https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49137
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27730
2018-03-23 09:27:06 -05:00
Simon Sapin
ee67e14034 Stabilize the copy_closures and clone_closures features
In addition to the `Fn*` family of traits, closures now implement `Copy` (and similarly `Clone`) if all of the captures do.
2018-03-23 11:37:07 +01:00
csmoe
ced7687c06 add test for issue-48238 2018-03-23 18:01:05 +08:00