Simply try to unpeel AsyncFnKindHelper goal in `emit_specialized_closure_kind_error`
Tweak the handling of `AsyncFnKindHelper` goals in `emit_specialized_closure_kind_error` to not be so special-casey, and just try to unpeel one or two layers of obligation causes to get to their underlying `AsyncFn*` goal.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/140292
Implement `pin!()` using `super let`
Tracking issue for super let: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/139076
This uses `super let` to implement `pin!()`.
This means we can remove [the hack](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138717) we had to put in to fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138596.
It also means we can remove the original hack to make `pin!()` work, which used a questionable public-but-unstable field rather than a proper private field.
While `super let` is still unstable and subject to change, it seems safe to assume that future Rust will always have a way to express `pin!()` in a compatible way, considering `pin!()` is already stable.
It'd help [the experiment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/139076) to have `pin!()` use `super let`, so we can get some more experience with it.
Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals`
Closes#131204
`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated
This will end up conflicting with the test in #138293 so whichever doesn't land first will need updating
--
# Stabilization Report
## General design
### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized?
[RFC 3695](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695), none.
### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.
None
### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?
None
## Has a call-for-testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?
Yes; only positive feedback was received.
## Implementation quality
### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)
Implemented in [#131034](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131034).
### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature
- [Basic usage, including `#[cfg()]`, `cfg!()` and `#[cfg_attr()]`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/true-false.rs)
- [`--cfg=true/false` on the command line being accessible via `r#true/r#false`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/raw-true-false.rs)
- [Interaction with the unstable `#[doc(cfg(..))]` feature](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/rustdoc-ui/cfg-boolean-literal.rs)
- [Denying `--check-cfg=cfg(true/false)`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/ui/check-cfg/invalid-arguments.rs)
- Ensuring `--cfg false` on the command line doesn't change the meaning of `cfg(false)`: `tests/ui/cfg/cmdline-false.rs`
- Ensuring both `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)` on the same item result in it being disabled: `tests/ui/cfg/both-true-false.rs`
### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?
The above mentioned issue; it should not block as it interacts with another unstable feature.
### 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
- `@clubby789` (RFC)
- `@Urgau` (Implementation in rustc)
### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?
`rustdoc`'s unstable`#[doc(cfg(..)]` has been updated to respect it. `cargo` has been updated with a forward compatibility lint to enable supporting it in cargo once stabilized.
## Type system and execution rules
### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)
A few lines to be added to the reference for configuration predicates, specified in the RFC.
compiletest: Make `SUGGESTION` annotations viral
If one of them is expected in a test file, then others should be annotated as well, in the same way as with `HELP`s and `NOTE`s.
This doesn't require much of an additional annotation burden, but simplifies the rules.
r? ```@jieyouxu```
UI tests: add missing diagnostic kinds where possible
The subset of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139427 that only adds diagnostic kinds to line annotations, without changing any other things in annotations or compiletest.
After this only non-viral `NOTE`s and `HELP`s should be missing.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Improve error message for `AsyncFn` trait failure for RPIT
Use a `WellFormedDerived` obligation cause to make sure we can turn an `AsyncFnKindHelper` trait goal into its parent `AsyncFn*` goal, then fix the logic for reporting `AsyncFn*` kind mismatches.
Best reviewed without whitespace.
Fixes#137905
r? oli-obk
When a `?` operation requires an `Into` conversion with additional bounds (like having a concrete error but wanting to convert to a trait object), we handle it speficically and provide the same kind of information we give other `?` related errors.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error: `E: std::error::Error` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:5:13
|
LL | fn foo() -> Result<(), Box<dyn std::error::Error>> {
| -------------------------------------- required `E: std::error::Error` because of this
LL | Ok(bar()?)
| ^ the trait `std::error::Error` is not implemented for `E`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= note: required for `Box<dyn std::error::Error>` to implement `From<E>`
```
Avoid talking about `FromResidual` when other more relevant information is being given, particularly from `rust_on_unimplemented`.
Stabilize target_feature_11
# Stabilization report
This is an updated version of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116114, which is itself a redo of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99767. Most of this commit and report were copied from those PRs. Thanks ```@LeSeulArtichaut``` and ```@calebzulawski!```
## Summary
Allows for safe functions to be marked with `#[target_feature]` attributes.
Functions marked with `#[target_feature]` are generally considered as unsafe functions: they are unsafe to call, cannot *generally* be assigned to safe function pointers, and don't implement the `Fn*` traits.
However, calling them from other `#[target_feature]` functions with a superset of features is safe.
```rust
// Demonstration function
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn avx2() {}
fn foo() {
// Calling `avx2` here is unsafe, as we must ensure
// that AVX is available first.
unsafe {
avx2();
}
}
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn bar() {
// Calling `avx2` here is safe.
avx2();
}
```
Moreover, once https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/135504 is merged, they can be converted to safe function pointers in a context in which calling them is safe:
```rust
// Demonstration function
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn avx2() {}
fn foo() -> fn() {
// Converting `avx2` to fn() is a compilation error here.
avx2
}
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn bar() -> fn() {
// `avx2` coerces to fn() here
avx2
}
```
See the section "Closures" below for justification of this behaviour.
## Test cases
Tests for this feature can be found in [`tests/ui/target_feature/`](f6cb952dc1/tests/ui/target-feature).
## Edge cases
### Closures
* [target-feature 1.1: should closures inherit target-feature annotations? #73631](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/73631)
Closures defined inside functions marked with #[target_feature] inherit the target features of their parent function. They can still be assigned to safe function pointers and implement the appropriate `Fn*` traits.
```rust
#[target_feature(enable = "avx2")]
fn qux() {
let my_closure = || avx2(); // this call to `avx2` is safe
let f: fn() = my_closure;
}
```
This means that in order to call a function with #[target_feature], you must guarantee that the target-feature is available while the function, any closures defined inside it, as well as any safe function pointers obtained from target-feature functions inside it, execute.
This is usually ensured because target features are assumed to never disappear, and:
- on any unsafe call to a `#[target_feature]` function, presence of the target feature is guaranteed by the programmer through the safety requirements of the unsafe call.
- on any safe call, this is guaranteed recursively by the caller.
If you work in an environment where target features can be disabled, it is your responsibility to ensure that no code inside a target feature function (including inside a closure) runs after this (until the feature is enabled again).
**Note:** this has an effect on existing code, as nowadays closures do not inherit features from the enclosing function, and thus this strengthens a safety requirement. It was originally proposed in #73631 to solve this by adding a new type of UB: “taking a target feature away from your process after having run code that uses that target feature is UB” .
This was motivated by userspace code already assuming in a few places that CPU features never disappear from a program during execution (see i.e. 2e29bdf908/crates/std_detect/src/detect/arch/x86.rs); however, concerns were raised in the context of the Linux kernel; thus, we propose to relax that requirement to "causing the set of usable features to be reduced is unsafe; when doing so, the programmer is required to ensure that no closures or safe fn pointers that use removed features are still in scope".
* [Fix #[inline(always)] on closures with target feature 1.1 #111836](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111836)
Closures accept `#[inline(always)]`, even within functions marked with `#[target_feature]`. Since these attributes conflict, `#[inline(always)]` wins out to maintain compatibility.
### ABI concerns
* [The extern "C" ABI of SIMD vector types depends on target features #116558](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116558)
The ABI of some types can change when compiling a function with different target features. This could have introduced unsoundness with target_feature_11, but recent fixes (#133102, #132173) either make those situations invalid or make the ABI no longer dependent on features. Thus, those issues should no longer occur.
### Special functions
The `#[target_feature]` attribute is forbidden from a variety of special functions, such as main, current and future lang items (e.g. `#[start]`, `#[panic_handler]`), safe default trait implementations and safe trait methods.
This was not disallowed at the time of the first stabilization PR for target_features_11, and resulted in the following issues/PRs:
* [`#[target_feature]` is allowed on `main` #108645](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/108645)
* [`#[target_feature]` is allowed on default implementations #108646](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/108646)
* [#[target_feature] is allowed on #[panic_handler] with target_feature 1.1 #109411](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/109411)
* [Prevent using `#[target_feature]` on lang item functions #115910](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115910)
## Documentation
* Reference: [Document the `target_feature_11` feature reference#1181](https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1181)
---
cc tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69098
cc ```@workingjubilee```
cc ```@RalfJung```
r? ```@rust-lang/lang```
```
error[E0610]: `{integer}` is a primitive type and therefore doesn't have fields
--> $DIR/attempted-access-non-fatal.rs:7:15
|
LL | let _ = 2.l;
| ^
|
help: if intended to be a floating point literal, consider adding a `0` after the period and a `f64` suffix
|
LL - let _ = 2.l;
LL + let _ = 2.0f64;
|
```
Shorten error message for callable with wrong return type
```
error: expected `{closure@...}` to return `Ret`, but it returns `Other`
```
instead of
```
error: expected `{closure@...}` to be a closure that returns `Ret`, but it returns `Other`
```
```
error: expected `{closure@...}` to return `Ret`, but it returns `Other`
```
instead of
```
error: expected `{closure@...}` to be a closure that returns `Ret`, but it returns `Other`
```
Compiler: Finalize dyn compatibility renaming
Update the Reference link to use the new URL fragment from https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1666 (this change has finally hit stable). Fixes a FIXME.
Follow-up to #130826.
Part of #130852.
~~Blocking it on #133372.~~ (merged)
r? ghost
```
error[E0271]: expected `{closure@fallback-closure-wrap.rs:18:40}` to be a closure that returns `()`, but it returns `!`
--> $DIR/fallback-closure-wrap.rs:19:9
|
LL | let error = Closure::wrap(Box::new(move || {
| -------
LL | panic!("Can't connect to server.");
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected `()`, found `!`
|
= note: expected unit type `()`
found type `!`
= note: required for the cast from `Box<{closure@$DIR/fallback-closure-wrap.rs:18:40: 18:47}>` to `Box<dyn FnMut()>`
```
```
error[E0271]: expected `{closure@dont-ice-for-type-mismatch-in-closure-in-async.rs:6:10}` to be a closure that returns `bool`, but it returns `Option<()>`
--> $DIR/dont-ice-for-type-mismatch-in-closure-in-async.rs:6:16
|
LL | call(|| -> Option<()> {
| ---- ------^^^^^^^^^^
| | |
| | expected `bool`, found `Option<()>`
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= note: expected type `bool`
found enum `Option<()>`
note: required by a bound in `call`
--> $DIR/dont-ice-for-type-mismatch-in-closure-in-async.rs:3:25
|
LL | fn call(_: impl Fn() -> bool) {}
| ^^^^ required by this bound in `call`
```
```
error[E0271]: expected `{closure@f670.rs:28:13}` to be a closure that returns `Result<(), _>`, but it returns `!`
--> f670.rs:28:20
|
28 | let c = |e| -> ! {
| -------^
| |
| expected `Result<(), _>`, found `!`
...
32 | f().or_else(c);
| ------- required by a bound introduced by this call
-Ztrack-diagnostics: created at compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/error_reporting/traits/fulfillment_errors.rs:1433:28
|
= note: expected enum `Result<(), _>`
found type `!`
note: required by a bound in `Result::<T, E>::or_else`
--> /home/gh-estebank/rust/library/core/src/result.rs:1406:39
|
1406 | pub fn or_else<F, O: FnOnce(E) -> Result<T, F>>(self, op: O) -> Result<T, F> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `Result::<T, E>::or_else`
```
Clean up all dead files inside `tests/ui/`
While rebasing #135860 I noticed that there are several dead `*.stderr` files inside `tests/ui/`.
When I checked thoroughly, I found 69 dead `*.$revision.stderr` files, 3 other dead `*.stderr` files and one dead `*.rs` file.
Prior to #134808, compiletest's `--bless` didn't remove dead `*.stderr` files when the set of revisions changed in any way (renamings, removals, additions, …) which explains their existence.
Regarding the dead `*.rs` file, that one was located inside an `auxiliary/` directory (together with a `*.stderr` file) despite not being meant to be an auxiliary file (it's not referenced by any `//@ aux-*`, it has an accompanying `*.stderr` file and it's obvious from looking at #111056 which added it). Ideally compiletest or tidy would forbid `*.std{out,err}` files inside `auxiliary/` dirs, that would've caught it. I moved it, updated it and turned it into a proper UI test.
---
How to reproduce:
1. Run `rm tests/ui/**/*.stderr`
2. Run `./x test tests/ui --bless` (or similar)
3. Manually / semi-automatically go through all tests that were ignored (likely due to your OS etc. not matching) and restore any stderr files that were overzealously removed
---
r? compiler
Add missing check for async body when suggesting await on futures.
Currently the compiler suggests adding `.await` to resolve some type conflicts without checking if the conflict happens in an async context. This can lead to the compiler suggesting `.await` in function signatures where it is invalid. Example:
```rs
trait A {
fn a() -> impl Future<Output = ()>;
}
struct B;
impl A for B {
fn a() -> impl Future<Output = impl Future<Output = ()>> {
async { async { () } }
}
}
```
```
error[E0271]: expected `impl Future<Output = impl Future<Output = ()>>` to be a future that resolves to `()`, but it resolves to `impl Future<Output = ()>`
--> bug.rs:6:15
|
6 | fn a() -> impl Future<Output = impl Future<Output = ()>> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected `()`, found future
|
note: calling an async function returns a future
--> bug.rs:6:15
|
6 | fn a() -> impl Future<Output = impl Future<Output = ()>> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: required by a bound in `A::{synthetic#0}`
--> bug.rs:2:27
|
2 | fn a() -> impl Future<Output = ()>;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `A::{synthetic#0}`
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
6 | fn a() -> impl Future<Output = impl Future<Output = ()>>.await {
| ++++++
```
The documentation of suggest_await_on_expect_found (`compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/error_reporting/infer/suggest.rs:156`) even mentions such a check but does not actually implement it.
This PR adds that check to ensure `.await` is only suggested within async blocks.
There were 3 unit tests whose expected output needed to be changed because they had the suggestion outside of async. One of them (`tests/ui/async-await/dont-suggest-missing-await.rs`) actually tests that exact problem but expects it to be present.
Thanks to `@llenck` for initially noticing the bug and helping with fixing it
Use `structurally_normalize` instead of manual `normalizes-to` goals in alias relate errors
r? `@lcnr`
I added `structurally_normalize_term` so that code that is generic over ty or const can use the structurally normalize helpers. See `tests/ui/traits/next-solver/diagnostics/alias_relate_error_uses_structurally_normalize.rs` for a description of the reason for the (now fixed) ICEs
This CL makes a number of small changes to dyn compatibility errors:
- "object safety" has been renamed to "dyn-compatibility" throughout
- "Convert to enum" suggestions are no longer generated when there
exists a type-generic impl of the trait or an impl for `dyn OtherTrait`
- Several error messages are reorganized for user readability
Additionally, the dyn compatibility error creation code has been
split out into functions.
cc #132713
cc #133267
