CFI: Monomorphize transparent ADTs before typeid
Monomorphise `#[repr(transparent)]` parameterized ADTs before turning them into an Itanium mangled String.
`#[repr(transparent)]` ADTs currently use the single field to represent them in their CFI type ID to ensure that they are compatible. However, if that type involves a type parameter instantiated at the ADT level, as in `ManuallyDrop`, this will currently ICE as the `Parameter` type cannot be mangled. Since this happens at lowering time, it should always be concrete after substitution.
Fixes#106230
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #104531 (Provide a better error and a suggestion for `Fn` traits with lifetime params)
- #105899 (`./x doc library --open` opens `std`)
- #106190 (Account for multiple multiline spans with empty padding)
- #106202 (Trim more paths in obligation types)
- #106234 (rustdoc: simplify settings, help, and copy button CSS by not reusing)
- #106236 (docs/test: add docs and a UI test for `E0514` and `E0519`)
- #106259 (Update Clippy)
- #106260 (Fix index out of bounds issues in rustdoc)
- #106263 (Formatter should not try to format non-Rust files)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Monomorphise `#[repr(transparent)]` parameterized ADTs before turning
them into an Itanium mangled String.
`#[repr(transparent)]` ADTs currently use the single field to represent
them in their CFI type ID to ensure that they are compatible. However,
if that type involves a type parameter instantiated at the ADT level, as
in `ManuallyDrop`, this will currently ICE as the `Parameter` type
cannot be mangled. Since this happens at lowering time, it should always
be concrete after substitution.
Fixes#106230
docs/test: add docs and a UI test for `E0514` and `E0519`
No UI test on `E0514`, it would need to compile with a different `rustc` version.
r? `@GuillaumeGomez`
Provide a better error and a suggestion for `Fn` traits with lifetime params
Given `Fn`-family traits with lifetime params in trait bounds like `fn f(_: impl Fn<'a>(&'a str) -> bool)`, we currently produce many unhelpful errors.
This PR allows these situations to suggest simply using Higher-Rank Trait Bounds like `for<'a> Fn(&'a str) -> bool`.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/103490.
Make trait/impl `where` clause mismatch on region error a bit more actionable
Improve `where` clause suggestions for GATs/methods that have incompatible region predicates in their `where` clauses.
Also addresses this diagnostic that went away https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/106129#discussion_r1056875772
Improve heuristics whether `format_args` string is a source literal
Previously, it only checked whether there was _a_ literal at the span of the first argument, not whether the literal actually matched up. This caused issues when a proc macro was generating a different literal with the same span.
This requires an annoying special case for literals ending in `\n` because otherwise `println` wouldn't give detailed diagnostics anymore which would be bad.
Fixes#106191
Currently, given `Fn`-family traits with lifetime params like
`Fn<'a>(&'a str) -> bool`, many unhelpful errors show up. These are a
bit confusing.
This commit allows these situations to suggest simply using
higher-ranked trait bounds like `for<'a> Fn(&'a str) -> bool`.
Bump master bootstrap compiler
This PR bumps the bootstrap compiler to the beta created earlier this week, cherry-picks the stabilization version number updates, and updates the `cfg(bootstrap)`s.
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
Properly calculate best failure in macro matching
Previously, we used spans. This was not good. Sometimes, the span of the token that failed to match may come from a position later in the file which has been transcribed into a token stream way earlier in the file. If precisely this token fails to match, we think that it was the best match because its span is so high, even though other arms might have gotten further in the token stream.
We now try to properly use the location in the token stream.
This needs a little cleanup as the `best_failure` field is getting out of hand but it should be mostly good to go. I hope I didn't violate too many abstraction boundaries..
Previously, it only checked whether there was _a_ literal at the span of
the first argument, not whether the literal actually matched up. This
caused issues when a proc macro was generating a different literal with
the same span.
This requires an annoying special case for literals ending in `\n`
because otherwise `println` wouldn't give detailed diagnostics anymore
which would be bad.
