correct template for `#[align]` attribute
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82232
related: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/142507
I didn't fully understand what `template!` did, clearly. An empty `#[align]` attribute was still rejected later, but without this change it does get suggested in certain cases.
I've also updated some outdated references to `#[repr(align)]` on functions.
r? ``@jdonszelmann``
rewrite `optimize` attribute to use new attribute parsing infrastructure
r? ```@oli-obk```
I'm afraid we'll get quite a few of these PRs in the future. If we get a lot of trivial changes I'll start merging multiple into one PR. They should be easy to review :)
Waiting on #138165 first
Tracking the old name of renamed unstable library features
This PR resolves the first problem of rust-lang/rust#141617 : tracking renamed unstable features. The first commit is to add a ui test, and the second one tracks the changes. I will comment on the code for clarification.
r? `@jdonszelmann`
There have been a lot of PR's reviewed by you lately, thanks for your time!
cc `@jyn514`
Clean `rustc_attr_parsing/src/lib.rs` documentation
Improves the documentation clarity in `rustc_attr_parsing` by restructuring content with clearer section headers, simplifying explanations of attribute types, making technical descriptions more precise.
r? ``@oli-obk``
make `rustc_attr_parsing` less dominant in the rustc crate graph
It has/had a glob re-export of `rustc_attr_data_structures`, which is a crate much lower in the graph, and a lot of crates were using it *just* (or *mostly*) for that re-export, while they can rely on `rustc_attr_data_structures` directly.
Previous graph:
Graph with this PR:
The first commit keeps the re-export, and just changes the dependency if possible. The second commit is the "breaking change" which removes the re-export, and "explicitly" adds the `rustc_attr_data_structures` dependency where needed. It also switches over some src/tools/*.
The second commit is actually a lot more involved than I expected. Please let me know if it's a better idea to back it out and just keep the first commit.
By using `@` patterns more.
Also, use `Symbol` more in a couple of errors to avoid some unnecessary
conversions to strings. This even removes a lifetime.
