Migrate most of `rustc_builtin_macros` to diagnostic impls
cc #100717
This is a couple of days work, but I decided to stop for now before the PR becomes too big. There's around 50 unresolved failures when `rustc::untranslatable_diagnostic` is denied, which I'll finish addressing once this PR goes thtough
A couple of outputs have changed, but in all instances I think the changes are an improvement/are more consistent with other diagnostics (although I'm happy to revert any which seem worse)
rustc_metadata: Filter encoded data more aggressively using `DefKind`
I focused on data that contains spans, because spans are expensive to encode/decode/hash, but also touched `should_encode_visibility` too.
One incorrect use of impl visibility in diagnostics is also replaced with trait visibility.
These don't optimize with debug assertions. For one of them, this
is due to the new alignment checks, for the other I'm not sure
what specifically blocks it.
this test was added for rust 0.4 and doesn't test anything specific.
The repro originally relied on extern functions which are now just
ordinary methods. It's also a run pass test even though `main` has
been commented out.
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #109527 (Set up standard library path substitution in rust-gdb and gdbgui)
- #109752 (Stall auto trait assembly in new solver for int/float vars)
- #109860 (Add support for RISC-V relax target feature)
- #109923 (Update `error [E0449]: unnecessary visibility qualifier` to be more clear)
- #110070 (The `wrapping_neg` example for unsigned types shouldn't use `i8`)
- #110146 (fix(doc): do not parse inline when output is json for external crate)
- #110147 (Add regression test for #104916)
- #110149 (Update books)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Add regression test for #104916Closes#104916
I haven't tested if it still passes with debug assertions enabled so it'd be better to wait for CI to be green.
r? compiler-errors
Update `error [E0449]: unnecessary visibility qualifier` to be more clear
This updates the error message `error[E0449]: unnecessary visibility qualifier` by clearly indicating that visibility qualifiers already inherit their visibility from a parent item. The error message previously implied that the qualifiers were permitted, which is not the case anymore.
Resolves#109822.
We store argument indexes on VarDebugInfo. Unlike the previous method of
relying on the variable index to know whether a variable is an argument,
this survives MIR inlining.
We also no longer check if var.source_info.scope is the outermost scope.
When a function gets inlined, the arguments to the inner function will
no longer be in the outermost scope. What we care about though is
whether they were in the outermost scope prior to inlining, which we
know by whether we assigned an argument index.
Add suggestion to remove `derive()` if invoked macro is non-derive
Adds to the existing `expected derive macro, found {}` error message:
```
help: remove the surrounding "derive()":
--> $DIR/macro-path-prelude-fail-4.rs:1:3
|
LL | #[derive(inline)]
| ^^^^^^^ ^
```
This suggestion will either fix the issue, in the case that the macro was valid, or provide a better error message if not
Not ready for merge yet, as the highlighted span is only valid for trivial formatting. Is there a nice way to get the parent span of the macro path within `smart_resolve_macro_path`?
Closes#109589
Fix a couple ICEs in the new `CastKind::Transmute` code
Check the sizes of the immediates, rather than the overall types, when deciding whether we can convert types without going through memory.
Fixes#110005Fixes#109992Fixes#110032
cc `@matthiaskrgr`
Migrate remainder of rustc_ty_utils to `SessionDiagnostic`
This moves the remaining errors in `rust_ty_utils` to `SessionsDiagnostic`.
r? ``@davidtwco``
Instantiate instead of erasing binder when probing param methods
Fixes#108836
There is a really old comment saying that a `WhereClauseCandidate` probe candidate "should not contain any inference variables", but I'm not really confident that that comment applies anymore. In contrast, other candidates that we assemble during method probe contain inference variables in their substitutions (e.g. `InherentImplCandidate`)...
Since this change is made only to support a nightly feature, I'm happy to gate the new behavior behind this feature flag or discuss it further.
r? types
Better diagnostic when pattern matching tuple structs
Fixes#108284
When trying to pattern match a tuple struct we might get a flawed error message if there are missing fields. E.g.
```
let x = Foo(100, 200);
if let Foo { 0: bar } = x { ... }
```
Produces this error:
```
error[E0769]: tuple variant `Foo` written as struct variant
--> hello.rs:5:12
|
5 | if let Foo { 0: foo } = x {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
help: use the tuple variant pattern syntax instead
|
5 | if let Foo(_, _) = x {
| ~~~~~~
```
Which doesn't highlight that we can still use the struct syntax but we need to fill missing fields. This pr changes this error to:
```
error[E0027]: pattern does not mention field `1`
--> hello.rs:5:12
|
5 | if let Foo { 0: foo } = x {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ missing field `1`
|
help: include the missing field in the pattern
|
5 | if let Foo { 0: foo, 1: _ } = x {
| ~~~~~~~~
help: if you don't care about this missing field, you can explicitly ignore it
|
5 | if let Foo { 0: foo, .. } = x {
| ~~~~~~
```
Suggest defining const parameter when appropriate
Helps a bit with #91119.
Following #105523's lead, I use placeholder `/* Type */` instead of `_` in the suggestion.
It should be easier for newcomers to parse.
`@rustbot` label A-diagnostics
r? diagnostics
Enforce that `PointerLike` requires a pointer-like ABI
At least temporarily, let's ban coercing things that are pointer-sized and pointer-aligned but *not* `Abi::Scalar(..)` into `dyn*`. See: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/104694#discussion_r1142522073
This can be lifted in the future if we decie that we *want* to be able to coerce something `repr(C)` into a `dyn*`, but we'll have to figure out what to do with Miri and codegen...
r? compiler
Add ability to transmute (somewhat) with generic consts in arrays
Previously if the expression contained generic consts and did not have a directly equivalent type, transmuting the type in this way was forbidden, despite the two sizes being identical. Instead, we should be able to lazily tell if the two consts are identical, and if so allow them to be transmuted.
This is done by normalizing the forms of expressions into sorted order of multiplied terms, which is not generic over all expressions, but should handle most cases.
This allows for some _basic_ transmutations between types that are equivalent in size without requiring additional stack space at runtime.
I only see one other location at which `SizeSkeleton` is being used, and it checks for equality so this shouldn't affect anywhere else that I can tell.
See [this Stackoverflow post](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/73085012/transmute-nested-const-generic-array-rust) for what was previously necessary to convert between types. This PR makes converting nested `T -> [T; 1]` transmutes possible, and `[uB*2; N] -> [uB; N * 2]` possible as well.
I'm not sure whether this is something that would be wanted, and if it is it definitely should not be insta-stable, so I'd add a feature gate.
