This message is no longer generated.
This is probably a good thing. The relevant span is entirely in user
code, and "format_args_nl" is an implementation detail with a name that
isn't even public.
Rewrite `inline` attribute parser to use new infrastructure and improve diagnostics for all parsed attributes
r? `@oli-obk`
This PR:
- creates a new parser for inline attributes
- creates consistent error messages and error codes between attribute parsers; inline and others
- as such changes a few error messages for other attributes to be (in my eyes) much more consistent
- tests ast-lowering lints introduced by rust-lang/rust#138164 since this is now useful for the first time
- Coalesce some useless error codes
Builds on top of rust-lang/rust#138164Closesrust-lang/rust#137950
Safer implementation of RepeatN
I've seen the "Use MaybeUninit for RepeatN" commit while reading This Week In Rust and immediately thought about something I've written some time ago - https://github.com/Soveu/repeat_finite/blob/master/src/lib.rs.
Using the fact, that `Option` will find niche in `(T, NonZeroUsize)`, we can construct something that has the same size as `(T, usize)` while completely getting rid of `MaybeUninit`.
This leaves only `unsafe` on `TrustedLen`, which is pretty neat.
rustdoc: make srcIndex no longer a global variable
this is one-time initialization data, it can just
be a function parameter.
while we're doing that, we can more the json parsing into the function and save a few extra bytes of storage for free, at least in the case of multiple crates in a doc bundle.
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138467
Sized Hierarchy: Part I
This patch implements the non-const parts of rust-lang/rfcs#3729. It introduces two new traits to the standard library, `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized`. See the RFC for the rationale behind these traits and to discuss whether this change makes sense in the abstract.
These traits are unstable (as is their constness), so users cannot refer to them without opting-in to `feature(sized_hierarchy)`. These traits are not behind `cfg`s as this would make implementation unfeasible, there would simply be too many `cfg`s required to add the necessary bounds everywhere. So, like `Sized`, these traits are automatically implemented by the compiler.
RFC 3729 describes changes which are necessary to preserve backwards compatibility given the introduction of these traits, which are implemented and as follows:
- `?Sized` is rewritten as `MetaSized`
- `MetaSized` is added as a default supertrait for all traits w/out an explicit sizedness supertrait already.
There are no edition migrations implemented in this, as these are primarily required for the constness parts of the RFC and prior to stabilisation of this (and so will come in follow-up PRs alongside the const parts). All diagnostic output should remain the same (showing `?Sized` even if the compiler sees `MetaSized`) unless the `sized_hierarchy` feature is enabled.
Due to the use of unstable extern types in the standard library and rustc, some bounds in both projects have had to be relaxed already - this is unfortunate but unavoidable so that these extern types can continue to be used where they were before. Performing these relaxations in the standard library and rustc are desirable longer-term anyway, but some bounds are not as relaxed as they ideally would be due to the inability to relax `Deref::Target` (this will be investigated separately).
It is hoped that this is implemented such that it could be merged and these traits could exist "under the hood" without that being observable to the user (other than in any performance impact this has on the compiler, etc). Some details might leak through due to the standard library relaxations, but this has not been observed in test output.
**Notes:**
- Any commits starting with "upstream:" can be ignored, as these correspond to other upstream PRs that this is based on which have yet to be merged.
- This best reviewed commit-by-commit. I've attempted to make the implementation easy to follow and keep similar changes and test output updates together.
- Each commit has a short description describing its purpose.
- This patch is large but it's primarily in the test suite.
- I've worked on the performance of this patch and a few optimisations are implemented so that the performance impact is neutral-to-minor.
- `PointeeSized` is a different name from the RFC just to make it more obvious that it is different from `std::ptr::Pointee` but all the names are yet to be bikeshed anyway.
- `@nikomatsakis` has confirmed [that this can proceed as an experiment from the t-lang side](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/435869-project-goals/topic/SVE.20and.20SME.20on.20AArch64.20.28goals.23270.29/near/506196491)
- FCP in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/137944#issuecomment-2912207485Fixesrust-lang/rust#79409.
r? `@ghost` (I'll discuss this with relevant teams to find a reviewer)
Revert overeager warning for misuse of `--print native-static-libs`
In a PR to emit warnings on misuse of `--print native-static-libs`, we did not consider the matter of composing parts of build systems. If you are not directly invoking rustc, it can be difficult to know when you will in fact compile a staticlib, so making sure uses `--print native-static-lib` correctly can be just a nuisance.
Next cycle we can reland a slightly more narrowly focused variant or one that focuses on `--emit` instead of `--print native-static-libs`. But in its current state, I am not sure the warning is very useful.
Make sure to propagate result from `visit_expr_fields`
We weren't propagating the `ControlFlow::Break` out of a struct field, which means that the solution implemented in rust-lang/rust#130443 didn't work for nested fields.
Fixesrust-lang/rust#142525.
Reject union default field values
Fixesrust-lang/rust#142555.
The [`default_field_values` RFC][rfc] does not specify that default field values may be used on `union`s, and it's not clear how default field values may be used with `union`s without an design extension to the RFC. So, for now, reject trying to use default field values with `union`s.
### Review notes
- The first commit adds the `union` with default field values test case to `tests/ui/structs/default-field-values/failures.rs`, where `union`s with default field values are currently accepted.
- The second commit rejects trying to supply default field values to `union` definitions.
- When `default_field_values` feature gate is disabled, we show the feature gate error when the user tries to write `union`s with default field values. When the feature gate is enabled, we reject this usage with
> unions cannot have default field values
``@rustbot`` label: +F-default_field_values
[rfc]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3681-default-field-values.html
`nominal_obligations` calls `predicates_of` on a `Sized` obligation,
effectively elaborating the trait and making the well-formedness checking
machinery do a bunch of extra work checking a `MetaSized` obligation is
well-formed, but given that both `Sized` and `MetaSized` are built-ins,
if `Sized` is otherwise well-formed, so `MetaSized` will be.
As a performance optimization, skip elaborating the supertraits of
`Sized`, and if a `MetaSized` obligation is being checked, then look for
a `Sized` predicate in the parameter environment. This makes the
`ParamEnv` smaller which should improve compiler performance as it avoids
all the iteration over the larger `ParamEnv`.
These tests just need blessing, they don't have any interesting behaviour
changes.
Some of these tests have new errors because `LegacyReceiver` cannot be
proven to be implemented now that it is also testing for `MetaSized` -
but this is just a consequence of the other errors in the test.
This test case is a reduction from the `hwc` crate on GitHub, following a
crater run. It passes with the next solver but fails on the current
solver due to a known limitation of the current solver. It starts fails
on the current solver with the `sized_hierarchy` changes because `?Sized`
is now a proper bound.
It seems like generics from `non_lifetime_binders` don't have any default
bounds like normal generics, so all of the `?Sized` relaxations need
to be further relaxed with `PointeeSized` for this test to be the
equivalent of before.
These tests necessarily need to change now that `?Sized` is not
sufficient to accept extern types and `PointeeSized` is now necessary. In
addition, the `size_of_val`/`align_of_val` test can now be changed to
expect an error.
When printing impl headers in a diagnostic, the compiler has to account
for `?Sized` implying `MetaSized` and new `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized`
bounds.
With `MetaSized` bounds replacing `?Sized` and being added as a
supertrait, the same relaxations applied to the standard library must be
applied to minicore.
Opting-out of `Sized` with `?Sized` is now equivalent to adding a
`MetaSized` bound, and adding a `MetaSized` or `PointeeSized` bound
is equivalent to removing the default `Sized` bound - this commit
implements this change in `rustc_hir_analysis::hir_ty_lowering`.
`MetaSized` is also added as a supertrait of all traits, as this is
necessary to preserve backwards compatibility.
Unfortunately, non-global where clauses being preferred over item bounds
(where `PointeeSized` bounds would be proven) - which can result in
errors when a `PointeeSized` supertrait/bound/predicate is added to some
items. Rather than `PointeeSized` being a bound on everything, it can
be the absence of a bound on everything, as `?Sized` was.
