Improve derive suggestion of const param
Make the suggestion not to remove the adt and use the name of the adt variant in the diagnostic.
r? `@BoxyUwU`
Migrate `UnsizedConstParamTy` to unstable impl of `ConstParamTy_`
Now that we have ``#[unstable_feature_bound]``, we can remove ``UnsizedConstParamTy`` that was meant to be an unstable impl of stable type and ``ConstParamTy_`` trait.
r? `@BoxyUwU`
Suggest bounds in more cases, accounting for type parameters referenced in predicate
Use a `ty::Visitor` to see if the failed predicate references a type parameter. If it does, then we only suggest adding a bound to an (associated) item only if the referenced parameter is present in its generics.
Provide adding bound suggestion in trait and impl associated functions in cases we previously weren't:
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `ApplicationError`
--> $DIR/suggest-complex-bound-on-method.rs:18:16
|
LL | t.run()?;
| -----^ the trait `From<<T as Trait>::Error>` is not implemented for `ApplicationError`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<_, <T as Trait>::Error>`
|
note: `ApplicationError` needs to implement `From<<T as Trait>::Error>`
--> $DIR/suggest-complex-bound-on-method.rs:12:1
|
LL | enum ApplicationError {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
help: consider introducing a `where` clause, but there might be an alternative better way to express this requirement
|
LL | fn thing<T: Trait>(&self, t: T) -> Result<(), ApplicationError> where ApplicationError: From<<T as Trait>::Error> {
| +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
```
Fixrust-lang/rust#144734.
a more general version of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/146080.
after a bit of hacking in [`fluent.rs`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/compiler/rustc_fluent_macro/src/fluent.rs), i discovered that i'm not the only one that is bad at following guidelines 😅. this pr lowercases the first letter of all the error messages in the codebase.
(i did not change things that are traditionally uppercased such as _MIR_, _ABI_ or _C_)
i think it's reasonable to run a `@bors try` so all the test suite is checked, as i cannot run some of the tests on my machine. i double checked (and replaced manually) all the old error messages, but better be safe than sorry.
in the future i will try to add a check in `x test tidy` that errors if an error message starts with an uppercase letter.
When encountering an unmet trait bound, point at local type that doesn't implement the trait:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `Bar<T>: Foo` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/issue-64855.rs:9:19
|
LL | pub struct Bar<T>(<Self as Foo>::Type) where Self: ;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ unsatisfied trait bound
|
help: the trait `Foo` is not implemented for `Bar<T>`
--> $DIR/issue-64855.rs:9:1
|
LL | pub struct Bar<T>(<Self as Foo>::Type) where Self: ;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
Rehome 32 `tests/ui/issues/` tests to other subdirectories under `tests/ui/`
rust-lang/rust#143902 divided into smaller, easier to review chunks.
Part of rust-lang/rust#133895
Methodology:
1. Refer to the previously written `tests/ui/SUMMARY.md`
2. Find an appropriate category for the test, using the original issue thread and the test contents.
3. Add the issue URL at the bottom (not at the top, as that would mess up stderr line numbers)
4. Rename the tests to make their purpose clearer
Inspired by the methodology that `@Kivooeo` was using.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Stabilize const TypeId::of
fixesrust-lang/rust#77125
# Stabilization report for `const_type_id`
## General design
### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized?
N/A the constness was never RFCed
### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.
`const_type_id` was kept unstable because we are currently unable to stabilize the `PartialEq` impl for it (in const contexts), so we feared people would transmute the type id to an integer and compare that integer.
### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?
`TypeId::eq` is not const at this time, and will only become const once const traits are stable.
## Has a Call for Testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?
This feature has been unstable for a long time, and most people just worked around it on stable by storing a pointer to `TypeId::of` and calling that at "runtime" (usually LLVM devirtualized the function pointer and inlined the call so there was no real performance difference).
A lot of people seem to be using the `const_type_id` feature gate (600 results for the feature gate on github: https://github.com/search?q=%22%23%21%5Bfeature%28const_type_id%29%5D%22&type=code)
We have had very little feedback except desire for stabilization being expressed.
## Implementation quality
Until these three PRs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/142789
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143696
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143736
there was no difference between the const eval feature and the runtime feature except that we prevented you from using `TypeId::of` at compile-time. These three recent PRs have hardened the internals of `TypeId`:
* it now contains an array of pointers instead of integers
* these pointers at compile-time (and in miri) contain provenance that makes them unique and prevents inspection. Both miri and CTFE will in fact error if you mess with the bits or the provenance of the pointers in any way and then try to use the `TypeId` for an equality check. This also guards against creating values of type `TypeId` by any means other than `TypeId::of`
### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)
N/A see above
### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature
Since we are not stabilizing any operations on `TypeId` except for creating `TypeId`s, the test coverage of the runtime implementation of `TypeId` covers all the interesting use cases not in the list below
#### Hardening against transmutes
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id.rs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id2.rs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id3.rs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id4.rs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id5.rs
#### TypeId::eq is still unstable
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_cmp_type_id.rs
### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/129014 is still unresolved, but it affects more the runtime version of `TypeId` than the compile-time.
### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there?
none
### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization
* `@eddyb`
* `@RalfJung`
### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?
N/A
## Type system and execution rules
### What compilation-time checks are done that are needed to prevent undefined behavior?
Already covered above. Transmuting types with private fields to expose those fields has always been library UB, but for the specific case of `TypeId` CTFE and Miri will detect it if that is done in any way other than for reconstructing the exact same `TypeId` in another location.
### Does the feature's implementation need checks to prevent UB or is it sound by default and needs opt in in places to perform the dangerous/unsafe operations? If it is not sound by default, what is the rationale?
N/A
### Can users use this feature to introduce undefined behavior, or use this feature to break the abstraction of Rust and expose the underlying assembly-level implementation? (Describe.)
N/A
### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)
Nothing more than what needs to exist for `TypeId` already.
## Common interactions
### Does this feature introduce new expressions and can they produce temporaries? What are the lifetimes of those temporaries?
N/A
### What other unstable features may be exposed by this feature?
N/A
Print thread ID in panic message
`panic!` does not print any identifying information for threads that are
unnamed. However, in many cases, the thread ID can be determined.
This changes the panic message from something like this:
thread '<unnamed>' panicked at src/main.rs:3:5:
explicit panic
To something like this:
thread '<unnamed>' (12345) panicked at src/main.rs:3:5:
explicit panic
Stack overflow messages are updated as well.
This change applies to both named and unnamed threads. The ID printed is
the OS integer thread ID rather than the Rust thread ID, which should
also be what debuggers print.
try-job: aarch64-apple
try-job: aarch64-gnu
try-job: dist-apple-various
try-job: dist-various-*
try-job: dist-x86_64-freebsd
try-job: dist-x86_64-illumos
try-job: dist-x86_64-netbsd
try-job: dist-x86_64-solaris
try-job: test-various
try-job: x86_64-gnu
try-job: x86_64-mingw-1
try-job: x86_64-msvc-1
`panic!` does not print any identifying information for threads that are
unnamed. However, in many cases, the thread ID can be determined.
This changes the panic message from something like this:
thread '<unnamed>' panicked at src/main.rs:3:5:
explicit panic
To something like this:
thread '<unnamed>' (0xff9bf) panicked at src/main.rs:3:5:
explicit panic
Stack overflow messages are updated as well.
This change applies to both named and unnamed threads. The ID printed is
the OS integer thread ID rather than the Rust thread ID, which should
also be what debuggers print.
Rehome 21 `tests/ui/issues/` tests to other subdirectories under `tests/ui/`
rust-lang/rust#143902 divided into smaller, easier to review chunks.
Part of rust-lang/rust#133895
Methodology:
1. Refer to the previously written `tests/ui/SUMMARY.md`
2. Find an appropriate category for the test, using the original issue thread and the test contents.
3. Add the issue URL at the bottom (not at the top, as that would mess up stderr line numbers)
4. Rename the tests to make their purpose clearer
Inspired by the methodology that ``@Kivooeo`` was using.
r? ``@jieyouxu``
`tests/ui/issues/`: The Issues Strike Back [2/N]
Some `tests/ui/issues/` housekeeping, to trim down number of tests directly under `tests/ui/issues/`. Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133895.
r? ``@jieyouxu``
expand: Micro-optimize prelude injection
Use `splice` to avoid shifting the other items twice.
Put `extern crate std;` first so it's already resolved when we resolve `::std::prelude::rust_20XX`.
Use `splice` to avoid shifting the other items twice.
Put `extern crate std;` first so it's already resolved when we resolve `::std::prelude::rust_20XX`.
Stop compilation early if macro expansion failed
Fixesrust-lang/rust#116180.
So there isn't really a type that is central for macro expansion and some errors are actually emitted (because the resolution happens after the expansion I suppose) after the expansion pass (like "not found macro"). Sometimes, errors are only emitted on the second "try" (to improve error output). So I couldn't reach a similar solution than what was done in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133937 and suggested by ````@estebank```` in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116180#issuecomment-3109468922. But maybe I missed something?
So in the end, I realized that there is method called every time (except one, described below) a macro error is actually emitted: `ExtCtxt::trace_macros_diag`. Considering I updated what it did, I renamed it into `macro_error_and_trace_macros_diag` to better reflect it.
There is only one call of `trace_macros_diag` which isn't reporting an error but just used for `macro_trace` feature, so I kept it as is.
r? ````@oli-obk````
Key changes include:
- Removal of the word "syntax" from the lint message. More accurately,
it could have been something like "syntax group" or "syntax
category", but avoiding it completely is easier.
- The primary lint message now reflects exactly which mismatch is
occurring, instead of trying to be general. A new `help` line is
general across the mismatch kinds.
- Suggestions have been reduced to be more minimal, no longer also
changing non-idiomatic but unrelated aspects.
- Suggestion text no longer mentions changes when those changes don't
occur in that specific suggestion.
Check assoc consts and tys later like assoc fns
This PR
1. checks assoc consts and tys later like assoc fns
2. marks assoc consts appear in poly-trait-ref live
For assoc consts, considering
```rust
#![deny(dead_code)]
trait Tr { // ERROR trait `Tr` is never used
const I: Self;
}
struct Foo; //~ ERROR struct `Foo` is never constructed
impl Tr for Foo {
const I: Self = Foo;
}
fn main() {}
```
Current this will produce unused `I` instead of unused `Tr` and `Foo` ([play](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2024&gist=e0490d4a2d522cb70437b26e514a3d9c)), because `const I: Self = Foo;` will be added into the worklist at first:
```
error: associated constant `I` is never used
--> src/main.rs:4:11
|
3 | trait Tr { // ERROR trait `Tr` is never used
| -- associated constant in this trait
4 | const I: Self;
| ^
|
note: the lint level is defined here
--> src/main.rs:1:9
|
1 | #![deny(dead_code)]
| ^^^^^^^^^
error: could not compile `playground` (bin "playground") due to 1 previous error
```
This also happens to assoc tys, see the [new test](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/compare/master...mu001999-contrib:rust:dead-code/impl-items?expand=1#diff-bf45fa403934a31c9d610a073ed2603d885e7e81572e8edf38b7f4e08a1f3531)
Fixesrust-lang/rust#126729
r? `````@petrochenkov`````
New tracking issues for const_ops and const_cmp
Let's do a clean start with new tracking issues to avoid mixing things up with the previous constification.
I assume the fact that the `PartialEq` *trait* and *impls* used different feature names was a mistake (the feature name on the impl is entirely irrelevant anyway).
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/143800, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/143802
r? ``@oli-obk``
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#143403 (Port several trait/coherence-related attributes the new attribute system)
- rust-lang/rust#143633 (fix: correct assertion to check for 'noinline' attribute presence before removal)
- rust-lang/rust#143647 (Clarify and expand documentation for std::sys_common dependency structure)
- rust-lang/rust#143716 (compiler: doc/comment some codegen-for-functions interfaces)
- rust-lang/rust#143747 (Add target maintainer information for aarch64-unknown-linux-musl)
- rust-lang/rust#143759 (Fix typos in function names in the `target_feature` test)
- rust-lang/rust#143767 (Bump `src/tools/x` to Edition 2024 and some cleanups)
- rust-lang/rust#143769 (Remove support for SwitchInt edge effects in backward dataflow)
- rust-lang/rust#143770 (build-helper: clippy fixes)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Port several trait/coherence-related attributes the new attribute system
Part of rust-lang/rust#131229
This ports:
- `#[const_trait]`
- `#[rustc_deny_explicit_impl]`
- `#[rustc_do_not_implement_via_object]`
- `#[rustc_coinductive]`
- `#[type_const]`
- `#[rustc_specialization_trait]`
- `#[rustc_unsafe_specialization_marker]`
- `#[marker]`
- `#[fundamental]`
- `#[rustc_paren_sugar]`
- `#[rustc_allow_incoherent_impl]`
- `#[rustc_coherence_is_core]`
This also changes `#[marker]` to error on duplicates instead of warning.
cc rust-lang/rust#142838, but I don't think it matters too much, since it's unstable.
r? ``@oli-obk``
