Don't mention `FromResidual` on bad `?`
Unless `try_trait_v2` is enabled, don't mention that `FromResidual` isn't implemented for a specific type when the implicit `From` conversion of a `?` fails. For the end user on stable, `?` might as well be a compiler intrinsic, so we remove that note to avoid further confusion and allowing other parts of the error to be more prominent.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `u8`
--> $DIR/bad-interconversion.rs:4:20
|
LL | fn result_to_result() -> Result<u64, u8> {
| --------------- expected `u8` because of this
LL | Ok(Err(123_i32)?)
| ------------^ the trait `From<i32>` is not implemented for `u8`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<_, i32>`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= help: the following other types implement trait `From<T>`:
`u8` implements `From<Char>`
`u8` implements `From<bool>`
```
When encountering a doc comment without an identifier after, we'd unconditionally state "this doc comment doesn't document anything", swallowing the *actual* error which is that the thing *after* the doc comment wasn't expected. Added a check that the found token is something that "conceptually" closes the previous item before emitting that error, otherwise just complain about the missing identifier.
In both of the following cases, the syntax error follows a doc comment:
```
error: expected identifier, found keyword `Self`
--> $DIR/doc-before-bad-variant.rs:4:5
|
LL | enum TestEnum {
| -------- while parsing this enum
...
LL | Self,
| ^^^^ expected identifier, found keyword
|
= help: enum variants can be `Variant`, `Variant = <integer>`, `Variant(Type, ..., TypeN)` or `Variant { fields: Types }`
```
```
error: expected identifier, found `<`
--> $DIR/doc-before-syntax-error.rs:2:1
|
LL | <>
| ^ expected identifier
```
Fix#71982.
Emit dropck normalization errors in borrowck
Borrowck generally assumes that any queries it runs for type checking will succeed, thinking that HIR typeck will have errored first if there was a problem. However as of #98641, dropck isn't run on HIR, so there's no direct guarantee that it doesn't error. While a type being well-formed might be expected to ensure that its fields are well-formed, this is not the case for types containing a type projection:
```rust
pub trait AuthUser {
type Id;
}
pub trait AuthnBackend {
type User: AuthUser;
}
pub struct AuthSession<Backend: AuthnBackend> {
data: Option<<<Backend as AuthnBackend>::User as AuthUser>::Id>,
}
pub trait Authz: Sized {
type AuthnBackend: AuthnBackend<User = Self>;
}
pub fn run_query<User: Authz>(auth: AuthSession<User::AuthnBackend>) {}
// ^ No User: AuthUser bound is required or inferred.
```
While improvements to trait solving might fix this in the future, for now we go for a pragmatic solution of emitting an error from borrowck (by rerunning dropck outside of a query) and making drop elaboration check if an error has been emitted previously before panicking for a failed normalization.
Closes#103899Closes#135039
r? `@compiler-errors` (feel free to re-assign)
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #136936 (Use 'yes' instead of 'while-echo' in tests/ui/process/process-sigpipe.rs except 'nto')
- #137026 (Stabilize (and const-stabilize) `integer_sign_cast`)
- #137059 (fix: Alloc new errorcode E0803 for E0495)
- #137177 (Update `minifier-rs` version to `0.3.5`)
- #137210 (compiler: Stop reexporting stuff in cg_llvm::abi)
- #137213 (Remove `rustc_middle::mir::tcx` module.)
- #137216 (eval_outlives: bail out early if both regions are in the same SCC)
- #137228 (Fix typo in hidden internal docs of `TrustedRandomAccess`)
- #137242 (Add reference annotations for the `do_not_recommend` attribute)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
My reasoning: the ruleset implemented by the same feature gate in
Edition 2024 always tries to eat the inherited reference first. For
consistency, it makes sense to me to say across all editions that users
should consider the inherited reference's mutability when wondering if a
`&mut` pattern will type.
x86: use SSE2 to pass float and SIMD types
This builds on the new X86Sse2 ABI landed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/137037 to actually make it a separate ABI from the default x86 ABI, and use SSE2 registers. Specifically, we use it in two ways: to return `f64` values in a register rather than by-ptr, and to pass vectors of size up to 128bit in a register (or, well, whatever LLVM does when passing `<4 x float>` by-val, I don't actually know if this ends up in a register).
Cc `@workingjubilee`
Fixes#133611
try-job: aarch64-apple
try-job: aarch64-gnu
try-job: aarch64-gnu-debug
try-job: test-various
try-job: x86_64-gnu-nopt
try-job: dist-i586-gnu-i586-i686-musl
try-job: x86_64-msvc-1
Add reference annotations for the `do_not_recommend` attribute
This adds reference rule identifiers for the tests of the `diagnostic::do_not_recommend` attribute.
Use 'yes' instead of 'while-echo' in tests/ui/process/process-sigpipe.rs except 'nto'
The `sh` of AIX prints a message about a broken pipe when using the `while-echo` command. It works as expected when using the `yes` command instead. `yes` was originally used in this test but was later replaced with `while-echo` because QNX Neutrino does not have `yes` ([Replace yes command by while-echo in test tests/ui/process/process-sigpipe.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/109379)). This PR updates the test to use `while-echo` for QNX Neutrino while reverting to `yes` for other platforms.
Suggest replacing `.` with `::` when encountering "expected value, found enum":
- in a method-call expression and the method has the same name as a tuple variant
- in a field-access expression and the field has the same name as a unit or tuple variant
When `Foo.field` or `Foo.method()` exprs are encountered, suggest `Foo::field` or `Foo::method()` when Foo is a type alias, not just
a struct, trait, or module.
Also rename test for this suggestion from issue-22692.rs to something more meaningful.
Pattern Migration 2024: fix incorrect messages/suggestions when errors arise in macro expansions
See the diff between the two commits for how this affected the error message and suggestion. In order to decide how to format those, the pattern migration diagnostic keeps track of which parts of the user's pattern cause problems in Edition 2024. However, it neglected to do some of this bookkeeping when pointing to macro expansion sites. This fixes that.
Do not ICE on default_field_value const with lifetimes
`#![feature(default_field_values)]` uses a `const` body that should be treated as inline `const`s, but is actually being detected otherwise. This is similar to the situation in #78174, so we take the same solution: we check if the const actually comes from a field, and if it does, we use that logic to get the appropriate lifetimes and not ICE during borrowck.
Fix#135649.
Unless `try_trait_v2` is enabled, don't mention that `FromResidual` isn't implemented for a specific type when the implicit `From` conversion of a `?` fails. For the end user on stable, `?` might as well be a compiler intrinsic, so we remove that note to avoid further confusion and allowing other parts of the error to be more prominent.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `u8`
--> $DIR/bad-interconversion.rs:4:20
|
LL | fn result_to_result() -> Result<u64, u8> {
| --------------- expected `u8` because of this
LL | Ok(Err(123_i32)?)
| ------------^ the trait `From<i32>` is not implemented for `u8`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<_, i32>`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= help: the following other types implement trait `From<T>`:
`u8` implements `From<Char>`
`u8` implements `From<bool>`
```
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #137095 (Replace some u64 hashes with Hash64)
- #137100 (HIR analysis: Remove unnecessary abstraction over list of clauses)
- #137105 (Restrict DerefPure for Cow<T> impl to T = impl Clone, [impl Clone], str.)
- #137120 (Enable `relative-path-include-bytes-132203` rustdoc-ui test on Windows)
- #137125 (Re-add missing empty lines in the releases notes)
- #137145 (use add-core-stubs / minicore for a few more tests)
- #137149 (Remove SSE ABI from i586-pc-windows-msvc)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
use add-core-stubs / minicore for a few more tests
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131485 for context. These are some tests I worked on in the past so I figured I'd see if `minicore` works for them. :)
Fix const items not being allowed to be called `r#move` or `r#static`
Because of an ambiguity with const closures, the parser needs to ensure that for a const item, the `const` keyword isn't followed by a `move` or `static` keyword, as that would indicate a const closure:
```rust
fn main() {
const move // ...
}
```
This check did not take raw identifiers into account, therefore being unable to distinguish between `const move` and `const r#move`. The latter is obviously not a const closure, so it should be allowed as a const item.
This fixes the check in the parser to only treat `const ...` as a const closure if it's followed by the *proper keyword*, and not a raw identifier.
Additionally, this adds a large test that tests for all raw identifiers in all kinds of positions, including `const`, to prevent issues like this one from occurring again.
fixes#137128
Overhaul `rustc_middle::limits`
In particular, to make `pattern_complexity` work more like other limits, which then enables some other simplifications.
r? ``@Nadrieril``
Because of an ambiguity with const closures, the parser needs to ensure
that for a const item, the `const` keyword isn't followed by a `move` or
`static` keyword, as that would indicate a const closure:
```rust
fn main() {
const move // ...
}
```
This check did not take raw identifiers into account, therefore being
unable to distinguish between `const move` and `const r#move`. The
latter is obviously not a const closure, so it should be allowed as a
const item.
This fixes the check in the parser to only treat `const ...` as a const
closure if it's followed by the *proper keyword*, and not a raw
identifier.
Additionally, this adds a large test that tests for all raw identifiers in
all kinds of positions, including `const`, to prevent issues like this
one from occurring again.
Rework `name_regions` to not rely on reverse scc graph for non-member-constrain usages
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/137015
Splits the `name_regions` into two versions: One meant for member region constraint error reporting (which I've renamed to `name_regions_for_member_constraint`), and one meant *just* to replace region vids with an external region.
Use the latter in the usage sites I added in #136559, since the regions returned by `name_regions_for_member_constraint` are also not *totally* accurate (which is fine for how they're used for member region constraint error reporting -- they're intentionally returning overapproximated universal regions so that we have something to name in `+ use<'a>` suggestions, because opaques can only capture universal regions and since member region constraints don't insert any edges into the region graph, the error region is probably gonna be shorter than a universal region) and because that function requires the reverse scc graph to have been computed which isn't done for our usages in #136559.
