Make cycle errors recoverable
In particular, this allows rustdoc to recover from cycle errors when normalizing associated types for documentation.
In the past, ```@jackh726``` has said we need to be careful about overflow errors: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/91430#issuecomment-983997013
> Off the top of my head, we definitely should be careful about treating overflow errors the same as
"not implemented for some reason" errors. Otherwise, you could end up with behavior that is
different depending on recursion depth. But, that might be context-dependent.
But cycle errors should be safe to unconditionally report; they don't depend on the recursion depth, they will always be an error whenever they're encountered.
Helps with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81091.
r? ```@lcnr``` cc ```@matthewjasper```
a fn pointer doesn't implement `Fn`/`FnMut`/`FnOnce` if its return type isn't sized
I stumbled upon #83915 which hasn't received much attention recently, and I wanted to revive it since this is one existing soundness hole that seems pretty easy to fix.
I'm not actually sure that the [alternative approach described here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83915#issuecomment-823643322) is sufficient, given the `src/test/ui/function-pointer/unsized-ret.rs` example I provided below. Rebasing the branch mentioned in that comment and testing that UI test, it seems that we actually end up only observing that `str: !Sized` during monomorphization, whereupon we ICE. Even if we were to fix that ICE, ideally we'd be raising an error that a fn pointer is being used badly during _typecheck_ instead of monomorphization, hence adapting the original approach in #83915.
I am happy to close this if people would prefer we rebase the original PR and land that -- I am partly opening to be annoying and get people thinking about this unsoundness again ❤️😸
cc: `@estebank` and `@nikomatsakis`
r? types
Here's a link to the thread: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/144729-t-types/topic/PR.20.2383915/near/235421351 for more context.
safe transmute: use `Assume` struct to provide analysis options
This task was left as a TODO in #92268; resolving it brings [`BikeshedIntrinsicFrom`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/core/mem/trait.BikeshedIntrinsicFrom.html) more in line with the API defined in [MCP411](https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/411).
**Before:**
```rust
pub unsafe trait BikeshedIntrinsicFrom<
Src,
Context,
const ASSUME_ALIGNMENT: bool,
const ASSUME_LIFETIMES: bool,
const ASSUME_VALIDITY: bool,
const ASSUME_VISIBILITY: bool,
> where
Src: ?Sized,
{}
```
**After:**
```rust
pub unsafe trait BikeshedIntrinsicFrom<Src, Context, const ASSUME: Assume = { Assume::NOTHING }>
where
Src: ?Sized,
{}
```
`Assume::visibility` has also been renamed to `Assume::safety`, as library safety invariants are what's actually being assumed; visibility is just the mechanism by which it is currently checked (and that may change).
r? `@oli-obk`
---
Related:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/411
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/99571
remove `commit_unconditionally`
`commit_unconditionally` is a noop unless we somehow inspect the current state of our snapshot. The only thing which does that is the leak check which was only used in one place where `commit_if_ok` is probably at least as, or even more, correct.
r? rust-lang/types
This initial implementation handles transmutations between types with specified layouts, except when references are involved.
Co-authored-by: Igor null <m1el.2027@gmail.com>
Fix hack that remaps env constness.
WARNING: might have perf implications.
Are there any more problems with having a constness in the `ParamEnv` now? :)
r? `@oli-obk`
