Remove trailing semicolon from macro call span
Macro call site spans are now less surprising/more consistent since they no longer contain a semicolon after the macro call.
The downside is that we need to do a little guesswork to get the semicolon in diagnostics. But this should not be noticeable since it is rare for the semicolon to not immediately follow the macro call.
HermitCore's kernel itself doesn't support TLS.
Consequently, the entries in x86_64-unknown-none-hermitkernel should be removed.
This commit should help to finalize #89062.
emitter: current substitution can be multi-line
Fixes#89280.
In `splice_lines`, there is some arithmetic to compute the required alignment such that future substitutions in a suggestion are aligned correctly. However, this assumed that the current substitution's span was only on a single line. In circumstances where this was not true, it could result in a arithmetic overflow when the substitution's end column was less than the substitution's start column.
r? ````@oli-obk````
The syn crate has gained support for let_else syntax in version 1.0.76,
see https://github.com/dtolnay/syn/pull/1057 .
In the three instances that use let_else, we've sent code through an
attr macro, which would create compile errors when there was no
let_else support in syn. To avoid this, we ran
`cargo +nightly update -p syn` for updating the syn crate.
This performs a substitution of code following the pattern:
let <id> = if let <pat> = ... { identity } else { ... : ! };
To simplify it to:
let <pat> = ... { identity } else { ... : ! };
By adopting the let_else feature.
In `splice_lines`, there is some arithmetic to compute the required
alignment such that future substitutions in a suggestion are aligned
correctly. However, this assumed that the current substitution's span
was only on a single line. In circumstances where this was not true, it
could result in a arithmetic overflow when the substitution's end
column was less than the substitution's start column.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
The PR had some unforseen perf regressions that are not as easy to find.
Revert the PR for now.
This reverts commit 6ae8912a3e, reversing
changes made to 86d6d2b738.
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #86011 (move implicit `Sized` predicate to end of list)
- #89821 (Add a strange test for `unsafe_code` lint.)
- #89859 (add dedicated error variant for writing the discriminant of an uninhabited enum variant)
- #89870 (Suggest Box::pin when Pin::new is used instead)
- #89880 (Use non-checking TLS relocation in aarch64 asm! sym test.)
- #89885 (add long explanation for E0183)
- #89894 (Remove unused dependencies from rustc_const_eval)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Suggest Box::pin when Pin::new is used instead
This fixes an incorrect diagnostic.
**Based on #89390**; only the last commit is specific to this PR. "Ignore whitespace changes" also helps here.
add dedicated error variant for writing the discriminant of an uninhabited enum variant
This is conceptually different from hitting an `Unreachable` terminator. Also add some sanity check making sure we don't write discriminants of things that do not have discriminants.
r? ``@oli-obk``
move implicit `Sized` predicate to end of list
In `Bounds::predicates()`, move the implicit `Sized` predicate to the
end of the generated list. This means that if there is an explicit
`Sized` bound, it will be checked first, and any resulting
diagnostics will have a more useful span.
Fixes#85998, at least partially. ~~Based on #85979, but only the last 2 commits are new for this pull request.~~ (edit: rebased) A full fix would need to deal with where-clauses, and that seems difficult. Basically, predicates are being collected in multiple stages, and there are two places where implicit `Sized` predicates can be inserted: once for generic parameters, and once for where-clauses. I think this insertion is happening too early, and we should actually do it only at points where we collect all of the relevant trait bounds for a type parameter.
I could use some help interpreting the changes to the stderr output. It looks like reordering the predicates changed some diagnostics that don't obviously have anything to do with `Sized` bounds. Possibly some error reporting code is making assumptions about ordering of predicates? The diagnostics for src/test/ui/derives/derives-span-Hash-*.rs seem to have improved, no longer pointing at the type parameter identifier, but src/test/ui/type-alias-impl-trait/generic_duplicate_param_use9.rs became less verbose for some reason.
I also ran into an instance of #84970 while working on this, but I kind of expected that could happen, because I'm reordering predicates. I can open a separate issue on that if it would be helpful.
``@estebank`` this seems likely to conflict (slightly?) with your work on #85947; how would you like to resolve that?
