This pattern of iterating over scopes and drops occurs multiple times in
this file, with slight variations. All of them use `for` loops except
this one. This commits changes it for consistency.
It's not needed, because `next` and `local` fields uniquely identify the
drop. This is a ~2% speed win on the very large program in #134404, and
it's also a tiny bit simpler.
Fix `unused_braces` lint suggestion when encountering attributes
This PR fixes the `unused_braces` lint suggestion when encountering attributes by not removing them in the suggestion.
Fixesrust-lang/rust#141549
interpret: add allocation parameters to `AllocBytes`
Necessary for a better implementation of [rust-lang/miri#4343](https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/pull/4343). Also included here is the code from that PR, adapted to this new interface for the sake of example and so that CI can run on them; the Miri changes can be reverted and merged separately, though.
r? `@RalfJung`
Deduplicate dyn compatibility violations due to coercion
Don't unnecessarily emit dyn compatibility violations due to coercion to a non-dyn-compatible target type.
For us to even have that target type, we would have had to write `dyn Trait` somewhere in source, and that would have led to us *already* emitting a dyn compatibility violation when checking that user written type is WF.
r? oli-obk
Properly analyze captures from unsafe binders
We need to represent the unsafe binder unwrap as an adjustment in HIR. Pretty straightforward b/c we already represent it as a projection elem in MIR.
Fixes#141418Fixes#141417
r? oli-obk
Emit dummy open drop for unsafe binder
Fixesrust-lang/rust#141394
We can't taint the body in wfcheck when we have a `T: Copy` bound failure, so we end up binding MIR here. Emit a dummy open drop so that drop elaboration doesn't fail.
r? oli-obk
Don't rerun goals if none of their vars have changed
r? `@ghost`
Alternative to rust-lang/rust#141488. I'm pretty sure that we don't need to re-run the goal at all if the inputs don't change... 🤔
interpret: do not force_allocate all return places
A while ago I cleaned up our `PlaceTy` a little, but as a side-effect of that, return places had to always be force-allocated. That turns out to cause quite a few extra allocations, and for a project we are doing where we marry Miri with a model checker, that means a lot of extra work -- local variables are just so much easier to reason about than allocations.
So, this PR brings back the ability to have the return place be just a local of the caller. To make this work cleanly I had to rework stack pop handling a bit, which also changes the output of Miri in some cases as the span for errors occurring during a particular phase of stack pop changed.
With these changes, a no-std binary with a function of functions that just take and return scalar types and that uses no pointers now does not move *any* local variables into memory. :)
r? `@oli-obk`
Intrinsics are not real functions and as such don't have any calling
convention. Trying to compute a calling convention for an intrinsic
anyway is a nonsensical operation.
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#134696 (Implement `normalize_lexically`)
- rust-lang/rust#140539 (Simplify `attribute_groups`)
- rust-lang/rust#140863 ([rustdoc] Unify type aliases rendering with other ADT)
- rust-lang/rust#140936 (Clarify WTF-8 safety docs)
- rust-lang/rust#140952 (Specify that split_ascii_whitespace uses the same definition as is_ascii_whitespace)
- rust-lang/rust#141472 (Attempt to improve the `std::fs::create_dir_all` docs related to atomicity)
- rust-lang/rust#141502 (ci: move PR job x86_64-gnu-tools to codebuild)
- rust-lang/rust#141559 (const-check: stop recommending the use of rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
const-check: stop recommending the use of rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable
I have seen way too many people see the compiler suggest this attribute and then just apply it without a second thought. This is bad. So let's just stop recommending it; for the rare case where someone needs it, they'll eventually ask us and that way we can be sure that it is truly needed. The dev-guide still also explains `rustc_allow_const_fn_unstable`.
Cc ``@rust-lang/wg-const-eval``
