rustc: Fix `crate` lint for single-item paths
This commit fixes recommending the `crate` prefix when migrating to 2018 for
paths that look like `use foo;` or `use {bar, baz}`
Closes#50660
* `rust_2018_breakage` -> `rust_2018_compatibility` - the lint for ensuring
that your code, in the 2015 edition, is compatible with the 2018 edition's
semantics. This is required to pass *before* you enable the 2018 edition.
* `rust_2018_migration` -> `rust_2018_idioms` - the lint for writing idiomatic
code after you've already enabled the 2018 edition
idiom lints for removing `extern crate`
Based off of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/49789
This contains two lints:
- One that suggests replacing pub extern crates with pub use, and removing non-pub extern crates entirely
- One that suggests rewriting `use modulename::...::cratename::foo` as `cratename::foo`
The latter is a bit tricky to emit suggestions for; for one this involves splicing spans (never a good idea), and it also won't be able to correctly
handle `use module::{cratename, foo}` and use-trees. I'm not sure how to proceed here. Currently it doesn't suggest anything at all.
Perhaps we can go the other way and suggest removal of all extern crates _except_ those used through modules (stash node ids somewhere) and suggest replacing those with `<visibility> use`?
r? @nikomatsakis
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48719
Improve lint for type alias bounds
First of all, I learned just today that I was wrong assuming that the bounds in type aliases are entirely ignored: It turns out they are used to resolve associated types in type aliases. So:
```rust
type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; // compiles
type T2<U> = U::Assoc; // fails
type T3<U> = <U as Bound>::Assoc; // "correct" way to write this, maybe?
```
I am sorry for creating this mess.
This PR changes the wording of the lint accordingly. Moreover, since just removing the bound is no longer always a possible fix, I tried to detect cases like `T1` above and show a helpful message to the user:
```
warning: bounds on generic parameters are not enforced in type aliases
--> $DIR/type-alias-bounds.rs:57:12
|
LL | type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; //~ WARN not enforced in type aliases
| ^^^^^
|
= help: the bound will not be checked when the type alias is used, and should be removed
help: use absolute paths (i.e., <T as Trait>::Assoc) to refer to associated types in type aliases
--> $DIR/type-alias-bounds.rs:57:21
|
LL | type T1<U: Bound> = U::Assoc; //~ WARN not enforced in type aliases
| ^^^^^^^^
```
I am not sure if I got this entirely right. Ideally, we could provide a suggestion involving the correct trait and type name -- however, while I have access to the HIR in the lint, I do not know how to get access to the resolved name information, like which trait `Assoc` belongs to above. The lint does not even run if that resolution fails, so I assume that information is available *somewhere*...
This is a follow-up for (parts of) https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/48326. Also see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/21903.
This changes the name of a lint, but that lint was just merged to master yesterday and has never even been on beta.
Replace feature(never_type) with feature(exhaustive_patterns).
feature(exhaustive_patterns) only covers the pattern-exhaustives checks
that used to be covered by feature(never_type)
First of all, the lint is specific for type aliases. Second, it turns out the
bounds are not entirely ignored but actually used when accessing associated
types. So change the wording of the lint, and adapt its name to reality.
The lint has never been on stable or beta, so renaming is safe.
Warn about ignored generic bounds in `for`
This adds a new lint to fix#42181. For consistency and to avoid code duplication, I also moved the existing "bounds in type aliases are ignored" here.
Questions to the reviewer:
* Is it okay to just remove a diagnostic error code like this? Should I instead keep the warning about type aliases where it is? The old code provided a detailed explanation of what's going on when asked, that information is now lost. On the other hand, `span_warn!` seems deprecated (after this patch, it has exactly one user left!).
* Did I miss any syntactic construct that can appear as `for` in the surface syntax? I covered function types (`for<'a> fn(...)`), generic traits (`for <'a> Fn(...)`, can appear both as bounds as as trait objects) and bounds (`for<'a> F: ...`).
* For the sake of backwards compatibility, this adds a warning, not an error. @nikomatsakis suggested an error in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/42181#issuecomment-306924389, but I feel that can only happen in a new epoch -- right?
Cc @eddyb
No longer parse it.
Remove AutoTrait variant from AST and HIR.
Remove backwards compatibility lint.
Remove coherence checks, they make no sense for the new syntax.
Remove from rustdoc.
This was added to cover up a lazy extra semicolon in #35849, but does
not actually make sense. This is removed as a part of the stabilization
of `never_type`.
[Syntax] Implement auto trait syntax
Implements `auto trait Send {}` as a substitute for `trait Send {} impl Send for .. {}`.
See the [internals thread](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/pre-rfc-renaming-oibits-and-changing-their-declaration-syntax/3086) for motivation. Part of #13231.
The first commit is just a rename moving from "default trait" to "auto trait". The rest is parser->AST->HIR work and making it the same as the current syntax for everything below HIR. It's under the `optin_builtin_traits` feature gate.
When can we remove the old syntax? Do we need to wait for a new `stage0`? We also need to formally decide for the new form (even if the keyword is not settled yet).
Observations:
- If you `auto trait Auto {}` and then `impl Auto for .. {}` that's accepted even if it's redundant.
- The new syntax is simpler internally which will allow for a net removal of code, for example well-formedness checks are effectively moved to the parser.
- Rustfmt and clippy are broken, need to fix those.
- Rustdoc just ignores it for now.
ping @petrochenkov @nikomatsakis
