For the former, it's fine for `inbounds` offsets to be one-past-the-end,
so it's okay even if the ZST is the last field in the layout:
> The base pointer has an in bounds address of an allocated object,
> which means that it points into an allocated object, or to its end.
https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#getelementptr-instruction
For the latter, even DST fields must always be inside the layout
(or to its end for ZSTs), so using inbounds is also fine there.
Unnamed union fields with enums are checked for, but if `find_field`
causes an ICE then the compiler won't get to that point.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david@davidtw.co>
Rollup of 3 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #121130 (Suggest moving definition if non-found macro_rules! is defined later)
- #121912 (Properly deal with GATs when looking for method chains to point at)
- #121927 (Add a proper `with_no_queries` to printing)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Most of this method's arguments are usually or always forwarded as-is to
recursive invocations.
Wrapping them in a dedicated struct allows us to document each struct field,
and lets us use struct-update syntax to indicate which arguments are being
modified when making a recursive call.
Properly deal with GATs when looking for method chains to point at
Fixes#121898.
~~While it prevents an ICE and the structured suggestion is correct, the method chain diagnostic notes are weird / useless / incorrect judging by a quick look. I guess I should improve that in this PR.~~ Sufficiently taken care of.
r? estebank or compiler-errors (#105332, #105674).
With rust 1.75 the absolute build path is embedding into '.rustc' section and which causes reproducibility issues. Detailed issue is here.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/120825#issuecomment-1964307219
With this change the 'absolute path' changed back to '/rust/$hash' format.
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #121248 (Move some tests)
- #121528 (Consider middle segments of paths in `unused_qualifications`)
- #121749 (Don't lint on executable crates with `non_snake_case` names)
- #121935 (library/ptr: mention that ptr::without_provenance is equivalent to deriving from the null ptr)
- #121945 (Run some ui-fulldeps tests on stage 1 again)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Consider middle segments of paths in `unused_qualifications`
Currently `unused_qualifications` looks at the last segment of a path to see if it can be trimmed, this PR extends the check to the middle segments also
```rust
// currently linted
use std::env::args();
std::env::args(); // Removes `std::env::`
```
```rust
// newly linted
use std::env;
std::env::args(); // Removes `std::`
```
Paths with generics in them are now linted as long as the part being trimmed is before any generic args, e.g. it will now suggest trimming `std::vec::` from `std::vec::Vec<usize>`
Paths with any segments that are from an expansion are no longer linted
Fixes#100979Fixes#96698
```
error[E0599]: no method named `map` found for struct `Vec<bool>` in the current scope
--> $DIR/vec-on-unimplemented.rs:3:23
|
LL | vec![true, false].map(|v| !v).collect::<Vec<_>>();
| ^^^ `Vec<bool>` is not an iterator
|
help: call `.into_iter()` first
|
LL | vec![true, false].into_iter().map(|v| !v).collect::<Vec<_>>();
| ++++++++++++
```
We used to provide some help through `rustc_on_unimplemented` on non-`impl Trait` and non-type-params, but this lets us get rid of some otherwise unnecessary conditions in the annotation on `Iterator`.
When encountering trait bound errors that satisfy some heuristics that
tell us that the relevant trait for the user comes from the root
obligation and not the current obligation, we use the root predicate for
the main message.
This allows to talk about "X doesn't implement Pattern<'_>" over the
most specific case that just happened to fail, like "char doesn't
implement Fn(&mut char)" in
`tests/ui/traits/suggest-dereferences/root-obligation.rs`
The heuristics are:
- the type of the leaf predicate is (roughly) the same as the type
from the root predicate, as a proxy for "we care about the root"
- the leaf trait and the root trait are different, so as to avoid
talking about `&mut T: Trait` and instead remain talking about
`T: Trait` instead
- the root trait is not `Unsize`, as to avoid talking about it in
`tests/ui/coercion/coerce-issue-49593-box-never.rs`.
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `&char: Pattern<'_>` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/root-obligation.rs:6:38
|
LL | .filter(|c| "aeiou".contains(c))
| -------- ^ the trait `Fn<(char,)>` is not implemented for `&char`, which is required by `&char: Pattern<'_>`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= note: required for `&char` to implement `FnOnce<(char,)>`
= note: required for `&char` to implement `Pattern<'_>`
note: required by a bound in `core::str::<impl str>::contains`
--> $SRC_DIR/core/src/str/mod.rs:LL:COL
help: consider dereferencing here
|
LL | .filter(|c| "aeiou".contains(*c))
| +
```
Fix#79359, fix#119983, fix#118779, cc #118415 (the suggestion needs
to change).
Add new `pattern_complexity` attribute to add possibility to limit and check recursion in pattern matching
Needed for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/issues/9528.
This PR adds a new attribute only available when running rust testsuite called `pattern_complexity` which allows to set the maximum recursion for the pattern matching. It is quite useful to ensure the complexity doesn't grow, like in `tests/ui/pattern/usefulness/issue-118437-exponential-time-on-diagonal-match.rs`.
r? `@Nadrieril`
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #120761 (Add initial support for DataFlowSanitizer)
- #121622 (Preserve same vtable pointer when cloning raw waker, to fix Waker::will_wake)
- #121716 (match lowering: Lower bindings in a predictable order)
- #121731 (Now that inlining, mir validation and const eval all use reveal-all, we won't be constraining hidden types here anymore)
- #121841 (`f16` and `f128` step 2: intrinsics)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
`f16` and `f128` step 2: intrinsics
Continuation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121728, another portion of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/114607.
This PR adds `f16` and `f128` intrinsics, and hooks them up to both HIR and LLVM. This is all still unexposed to the frontend, which will probably be the next step. Also update itanium mangling per `@rcvalle's` in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121728/files#r1506570300, and fix a typo from step 1.
Once these types are usable in code, I will add the codegen tests from #114607 (codegen is passing on that branch)
This does add more `unimplemented!`s to Clippy, but I still don't think we can do better until library support is added.
r? `@compiler-errors`
cc `@Nilstrieb`
`@rustbot` label +T-compiler +F-f16_and_f128
Now that inlining, mir validation and const eval all use reveal-all, we won't be constraining hidden types here anymore
r? `@compiler-errors`
one bubble down, two more to go
the test is unrelated, just something I noticed would be good to test in both the old solver and the new.
match lowering: Lower bindings in a predictable order
After the recent refactorings, we can now lower bindings in a truly predictable order. The order in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120214 was an improvement but not very clear. With this PR, we lower bindings from left to right, with the special case that `x @ pat` is traversed as `pat @ x` (i.e. `x` is lowered after any bindings in `pat`).
This description only applies in the absence of or-patterns. Or-patterns make everything complicated, because the binding place depends on the subpattern. Until I have a better idea I leave them to be handled in whatever weird order arises from today's code.
r? `@matthewjasper`
Add initial support for DataFlowSanitizer
Adds initial support for DataFlowSanitizer to the Rust compiler. It currently supports `-Zsanitizer-dataflow-abilist`. Additional options for it can be passed to LLVM command line argument processor via LLVM arguments using `llvm-args` codegen option (e.g., `-Cllvm-args=-dfsan-combine-pointer-labels-on-load=false`).
Before, the SwitchInt cases were computed in two passes: if the first
pass accepted e.g. 0..=5 and then 1, the second pass would not accept
0..=5 anymore because 1 would be listed in the SwitchInt options.
Now there's a single pass, so if we sort 0..=5 we must take care to not
sort a subsequent 1.
This commit adds a new target called `wasm32-wasip1` to rustc.
This new target is explained in these two MCPs:
* https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/607
* https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/695
In short, the previous `wasm32-wasi` target is going to be renamed to
`wasm32-wasip1` to better live alongside the [new
`wasm32-wasip2` target](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119616).
This new target is added alongside the `wasm32-wasi` target and has the
exact same definition as the previous target. This PR is effectively a
rename of `wasm32-wasi` to `wasm32-wasip1`. Note, however, that
as explained in rust-lang/compiler-team#695 the previous `wasm32-wasi`
target is not being removed at this time. This change will reach stable
Rust before even a warning about the rename will be printed. At this
time this change is just the start where a new target is introduced and
users can start migrating if they support only Nightly for example.
The ordinary lowering of `thir::ExprKind::Let` is unreachable
After desugaring, `let` expressions should only appear inside `if` expressions or `match` guards, possibly nested within a let-chain. In both cases they are specifically handled by the lowerings of those expressions, so this case is currently unreachable.
---
Context: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/182449-t-compiler.2Fhelp/topic/Lowering.20of.20.60thir.3A.3AExprKind.3A.3ALet.60.20is.20unreachable
My conclusions are partly based on the observation that stubbing out this match arm doesn't cause any test failures. So either this really is unreachable, or it can be reached in some obscure circumstances that our test suite doesn't cover.
If we end up needing this code (or something like it) for an implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3573, it should be easy enough to pull it back out of version control history.
I looked into having the `if`/`match` lowerings call back into `expr_into_dest`, but from what I can tell that won't work well, because there are extra scoping considerations that require some awareness of the enclosing if/match.
r? ```@Nadrieril```
