Check assoc consts and tys later like assoc fns
This PR
1. checks assoc consts and tys later like assoc fns
2. marks assoc consts appear in poly-trait-ref live
For assoc consts, considering
```rust
#![deny(dead_code)]
trait Tr { // ERROR trait `Tr` is never used
const I: Self;
}
struct Foo; //~ ERROR struct `Foo` is never constructed
impl Tr for Foo {
const I: Self = Foo;
}
fn main() {}
```
Current this will produce unused `I` instead of unused `Tr` and `Foo` ([play](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2024&gist=e0490d4a2d522cb70437b26e514a3d9c)), because `const I: Self = Foo;` will be added into the worklist at first:
```
error: associated constant `I` is never used
--> src/main.rs:4:11
|
3 | trait Tr { // ERROR trait `Tr` is never used
| -- associated constant in this trait
4 | const I: Self;
| ^
|
note: the lint level is defined here
--> src/main.rs:1:9
|
1 | #![deny(dead_code)]
| ^^^^^^^^^
error: could not compile `playground` (bin "playground") due to 1 previous error
```
This also happens to assoc tys, see the [new test](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/compare/master...mu001999-contrib:rust:dead-code/impl-items?expand=1#diff-bf45fa403934a31c9d610a073ed2603d885e7e81572e8edf38b7f4e08a1f3531)
Fixesrust-lang/rust#126729
r? `````@petrochenkov`````
`rustc_pattern_analysis`: always check that deref patterns don't match on the same place as normal constructors
In rust-lang/rust#140106, deref pattern validation was tied to the `deref_patterns` feature to temporarily avoid affecting perf. However:
- As of rust-lang/rust#143414, box patterns are represented as deref patterns in `rustc_pattern_analysis`. Since they can be used by enabling `box_patterns` instead of `deref_patterns`, it was possible for them to skip validation, resulting in an ICE. This fixes that and adds a regression test.
- External tooling (e.g. rust-analyzer) will also need to validate matches containing deref patterns, which was not possible. This fixes that by making `compute_match_usefulness` validate deref patterns by default.
In order to avoid doing an extra pass for anything with patterns, the second commit makes `RustcPatCtxt` keep track of whether it encounters a deref pattern, so that it only does the check if so. This is purely for performance. If the perf impact of the first commit is negligible and the complexity cost introduced by the second commit is significant, it may be worth dropping the latter.
r? `@Nadrieril`
`tests/ui`: A New Order [24/N]
> [!NOTE]
>
> Intermediate commits are intended to help review, but will be squashed prior to merge.
Some `tests/ui/` housekeeping, to trim down number of tests directly under `tests/ui/`. Part of rust-lang/rust#133895.
r? `@tgross35`
Use non-2015 edition paths in tests that do not test for their resolution
This allows for testing these tests on editions other than 2015
Follow up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/141888
Defer evaluating type system constants when they use infers or params
Split out of #137972, the parts necessary for associated const equality and min generic const args to make progress and have correct semantics around when CTFE is invoked. According to a [previous perf run](https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=93257e2d20809d82d1bc0fcc1942480d1a66d7cd&end=01b4cbf0f47c3f782330db88fa5ba199bba1f8a2&stat=instructions:u) of adding the new `const_arg_kind` query we should expect minor regressions here.
I think this is acceptable as we should be able to remove this query relatively soon once mgca is more complete as we'll then be able to implement GCE in terms of mgca and rip out `GCEConst` at which point it's trivial to determine what kind of anon const we're dealing with (either it has generics and is a repeat expr hack, or it doesnt and is a normal anon const).
This should only affect unstable code as we handle repeat exprs specially and those are the only kinds of type system consts that are allowed to make use of generic parameters.
Fixes#133066Fixes#133199Fixes#136894Fixes#137813
r? compiler-errors
only resolve top-level guard patterns' guards once
We resolve guard patterns' guards in `resolve_pattern_inner`, so to avoid resolving them multiple times, we must avoid doing so earlier. To accomplish this, `LateResolutionVisitor::visit_pat` contains a case for guard patterns that avoids visiting their guards while walking patterns.
This PR fixes#141265, which was due to `visit::walk_pat` being used instead; this meant guards at the top level of a pattern would be visited twice. e.g. it would ICE on `for x if x in [] {}`, but not `for (x if x) in [] {}`. `visit_pat` was already used for the guard pattern in the second example, on account of the top-level pattern being parens.
When checking a pattern with guards in it, `GatherLocalsVisitor` will
visit both the pattern (when type-checking the let, arm, or param
containing it) and the guard expression (when checking the guard
itself). This keeps it from visiting the guard when visiting the
pattern, since otherwise it would gather locals from the guard twice,
which would lead to a delayed bug: "evaluated expression more than
once".
We resolve guard patterns' guards in `resolve_pattern_inner`, so to
avoid resolving them multiple times, we must avoid doing so earlier. To
accomplish this, `LateResolutionVisitor::visit_pat` contains a case for
guard patterns that avoids visiting their guards while walking patterns.
This fixes an ICE due to `visit::walk_pat` being used instead, which
meant guards at the top level of a pattern would be visited twice.
name resolution for guard patterns
This PR provides an initial implementation of name resolution for guard patterns [(RFC 3637)](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3637-guard-patterns.md). This does not change the requirement that the bindings on either side of an or-pattern must be the same [(proposal here)](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3637-guard-patterns.md#allowing-mismatching-bindings-when-possible); the code that handles that is separate from what this PR touches, so I'm saving it for a follow-up.
On a technical level, this separates "collecting the bindings in a pattern" (which was already done for or-patterns) from "introducing those bindings into scope". I believe the approach used here can be extended straightforwardly in the future to work with `if let` guard patterns, but I haven't tried it myself since we don't allow those yet.
Tracking issue for guard patterns: #129967
cc ``@Nadrieril``
Without adding proper support for mixed exhaustiveness, mixing deref
patterns with normal constructors would either violate
`ConstructorSet::split`'s invariant 4 or 7. We'd either be ignoring rows
with normal constructors or we'd have problems in unspecialization from
non-disjoint constructors. Checking mixed exhaustivenss similarly to how
unions are currently checked should work, but the diagnostics for unions
are confusing. Since mixing deref patterns with normal constructors is
pretty niche (currently it only makes sense for `Cow`), emitting an
error lets us avoid committing to supporting mixed exhaustiveness
without a good answer for the diagnostics.
This does not yet handle the case of mixed deref patterns with normal
constructors; it'll ICE in `Constructor::is_covered_by`. That'll be
fixed in a later commit.
compiletest: Do not require annotations on empty labels and suggestions
Unlike other empty diagnostics, empty labels (only underlining spans) and empty suggestions (suggestions to remove something) are quite usual and do not require any special attention and annotations.
This effectively reverts a part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139485.
r? `@jieyouxu`
This allows deref patterns to move out of boxes.
Implementation-wise, I've opted to put the information of whether a
deref pattern uses a built-in deref or a method call in the THIR. It'd
be a bit less code to check `.is_box()` everywhere, but I think this way
feels more robust (and we don't have a `mutability` field in the THIR
that we ignore when the smart pointer's a box). I'm not sure about the
naming (or using `ByRef`), though.
Since deref patterns on boxes will be lowered differently, I'll be
making a separate test file for them. This makes sure we're still
testing the generic `Deref(Mut)::deref(_mut)`-based lowering.
`deref_patterns`: support string and byte string literals in explicit `deref!("...")` patterns
When `deref_patterns` is enabled, this allows string literal patterns to be used where `str` is expected and byte string literal patterns to be used where `[u8]` or `[u8; N]` is expected. This lets them be used in explicit `deref!("...")` patterns to match on `String`, `Box<str>`, `Vec<u8>`, `Box<[u8;N]>`, etc. (as well as to match on slices and arrays obtained through other means). Implementation-wise, this follows up on #138992: similar to how byte string literals matching on `&[u8]` is implemented, this changes the type of the patterns as determined by HIR typeck, which informs const-to-pat on how to translate them to THIR (though strings needed a bit of extra work since we need references to call `<str as PartialEq>::eq` in the MIR lowering for string equality tests).
This PR does not add support for implicit deref pattern syntax (e.g. `"..."` matching on `String`, as `string_deref_patterns` allows). I have that implemented locally, but I'm saving it for a follow-up PR[^1].
This also does not add support for using named or associated constants of type `&str` where `str` is expected (nor likewise with named byte string constants). It'd be possible to add that if there's an appetite for it, but I figure it's simplest to start with literals.
This is gated by the `deref_patterns` feature since it's motivated by deref patterns. That said, its impact reaches outside of deref patterns; it may warrant a separate experiment and feature gate, particularly factoring in the follow-up[^1]. Even without deref patterns, I think there's probably motivation for these changes.
The update to the unstable book added by this will conflict with #140022, so they shouldn't be merged at the same time.
Tracking issue for deref patterns: #87121
r? ``@oli-obk``
cc ``@Nadrieril``
[^1]: The piece missing from this PR to support implicit deref pattern syntax is to allow string literal patterns to implicitly dereference their scrutinees before matching (see #44849). As a consequence, it also makes examples like the one in that issue work (though it's still gated by `deref_patterns`). I can provide more information on how I've implemented it or open a draft if it'd help in reviewing this PR.
Do not remove trivial `SwitchInt` in analysis MIR
This PR ensures that we don't prematurely remove trivial `SwitchInt` terminators which affects both the borrow-checking and runtime semantics (i.e. UB) of the code. Previously the `SimplifyCfg` optimization was removing `SwitchInt` terminators when they was "trivial", i.e. when all arms branched to the same basic block, even if that `SwitchInt` terminator had the side-effect of reading an operand which (for example) may not be initialized or may point to an invalid place in memory.
This behavior is unlike all other optimizations, which are only applied after "analysis" (i.e. borrow-checking) is finished, and which Miri disables to make sure the compiler doesn't silently remove UB.
Fixing this code "breaks" (i.e. unmasks) code that used to borrow-check but no longer does, like:
```rust
fn foo() {
let x;
let (0 | _) = x;
}
```
This match expression should perform a read because `_` does not shadow the `0` literal pattern, and the compiler should have to read the match scrutinee to compare it to 0. I've checked that this behavior does not actually manifest in practice via a crater run which came back clean: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139042#issuecomment-2767436367
As a side-note, it may be tempting to suggest that this is actually a good thing or that we should preserve this behavior. If we wanted to make this work (i.e. trivially optimize out reads from matches that are redundant like `0 | _`), then we should be enabling this behavior *after* fixing this. However, I think it's kinda unprincipled, and for example other variations of the code don't even work today, e.g.:
```rust
fn foo() {
let x;
let (0.. | _) = x;
}
```
deref patterns: implement implicit deref patterns
This implements implicit deref patterns (per https://hackmd.io/4qDDMcvyQ-GDB089IPcHGg#Implicit-deref-patterns) and adds tests and an unstable book chapter.
Best reviewed commit-by-commit. Overall there's a lot of additions, but a lot of that is tests, documentation, and simple(?) refactoring.
Tracking issue: #87121
r? ``@Nadrieril``
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.
Implicit deref patterns allow previously ill-typed programs. Make sure
they're still ill-typed without the feature gate. I've thrown in a test
for `deref!(_)` too, though it seems it refers to `deref_patterns` as a
library feature.
