Expand the automatic implementation of `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized` so
that it is also implemented on non-`Sized` types, just not `ty::Foreign`
(extern type).
Introduce the `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized` traits as supertraits of
`Sized` and initially implement it on everything that currently
implements `Sized` to isolate any changes that simply adding the
traits introduces.
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #140056 (Fix a wrong error message in 2024 edition)
- #140220 (Fix detection of main function if there are expressions around it)
- #140249 (Remove `weak` alias terminology)
- #140316 (Introduce `BoxMarker` to improve pretty-printing correctness)
- #140347 (ci: clean more disk space in codebuild)
- #140349 (ci: use aws codebuild for the `dist-x86_64-linux` job)
- #140379 (rustc-dev-guide subtree update)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Remove `weak` alias terminology
I find the "weak" alias terminology to be quite confusing. It implies the existence of "strong" aliases (which do not exist) and I'm not really sure what about weak aliases is "weak". I much prefer "free alias" as the term. I think it's much more obvious what it means as "free function" is a well defined term that already exists in rust.
It's also a little confusing given "weak alias" is already a term in linker/codegen spaces which are part of the compiler too. Though I'm not particularly worried about that as it's usually very obvious if you're talking about the type system or not lol. I'm also currently trying to write documentation about aliases and it's somewhat awkward/confusing to be talking about *weak* aliases, when I'm not really sure what the basis for that as the term actually *is*.
I would also be happy to just find out there's a nice meaning behind calling them "weak" aliases :-)
r? `@oli-obk`
maybe we want a types MCP to decide on a specific naming here? or maybe we think its just too late to go back on this naming decision ^^'
Remove comment about handling non-global where bounds with corresponding projection
This comment is no longer relevant since we only assemble rigid projections if no param-env candidates hold.
Also remove a stray comment from the old solver.
r? lcnr
add `TypingMode::Borrowck`
Shares the first commit with #138499, doesn't really matter which PR to land first 😊😁
Introduces `TypingMode::Borrowck` which unlike `TypingMode::Analysis`, uses the hidden type computed by HIR typeck as the initial value of opaques instead of an unconstrained infer var. This is a part of https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/issues/129.
Using this new `TypingMode` is unfortunately a breaking change for now, see tests/ui/impl-trait/non-defining-uses/as-projection-term.rs. Using an inference variable as the initial value results in non-defining uses in the defining scope. We therefore only enable it if with `-Znext-solver=globally` or `-Ztyping-mode-borrowck`
To do that the PR contains the following changes:
- `TypeckResults::concrete_opaque_type` are already mapped to the definition of the opaque type
- writeback now checks that the non-lifetime parameters of the opaque are universal
- for this, `fn check_opaque_type_parameter_valid` is moved from `rustc_borrowck` to `rustc_trait_selection`
- we add a new `query type_of_opaque_hir_typeck` which, using the same visitors as MIR typeck, attempts to merge the hidden types from HIR typeck from all defining scopes
- done by adding a `DefiningScopeKind` flag to toggle between using borrowck and HIR typeck
- the visitors stop checking that the MIR type matches the HIR type. This is trivial as the HIR type are now used as the initial hidden types of the opaque. This check is useful as a safeguard when not using `TypingMode::Borrowck`, but adding it to the new structure is annoying and it's not soundness critical, so I intend to not add it back.
- add a `TypingMode::Borrowck` which behaves just like `TypingMode::Analysis` except when normalizing opaque types
- it uses `type_of_opaque_hir_typeck(opaque)` as the initial value after replacing its regions with new inference vars
- it uses structural lookup in the new solver
fixes#112201, fixes#132335, fixes#137751
r? `@compiler-errors` `@oli-obk`
If a type has unsafe fields, its safety invariants are not simply
the conjunction of its field types' safety invariants. Consequently,
it's invalid to reason about the safety properties of these types
in a purely structural manner — i.e., the manner in which `auto`
traits are implemented.
Makes progress towards #132922.
the behavior of the type system not only depends on the current
assumptions, but also the currentnphase of the compiler. This is
mostly necessary as we need to decide whether and how to reveal
opaque types. We track this via the `TypingMode`.
