Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #106347 (More accurate spans for arg removal suggestion)
- #108057 (Prevent some attributes from being merged with others on reexports)
- #108090 (`if $c:expr { Some($r:expr) } else { None }` =>> `$c.then(|| $r)`)
- #108092 (note issue for feature(packed_bundled_libs))
- #108099 (use chars instead of strings where applicable)
- #108115 (Do not ICE on unmet trait alias bounds)
- #108125 (Add new people to the compiletest review rotation)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Optimize `mk_region`
PR #107869 avoiding some interning under `mk_ty` by special-casing `Ty` variants with simple (integer) bodies. This PR does something similar for regions.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Don't suggest `#[doc(hidden)]` trait methods with matching return type
Fixes#107983, addressing the bad suggestion.
The test can probably be made more specific to this case, but I'm unsure how.
`@rustbot` label +A-diagnostics
Avoid accessing HIR when it can be avoided
Experiment to see if it helps some incremental cases.
Will be rebased once https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107942 gets merged.
r? `@ghost`
Suggest the correct array length on mismatch
Fixes#107156
I wasn't able to find a way to get the `Span` for the actual array size unfortunately, so this suggestion can't be applied automatically.
``@rustbot`` label +A-diagnostics
Much like there are specialized variants of `mk_ty`. This will enable
some optimization in the next commit.
Also rename the existing `re_error*` functions as `mk_re_error*`, for
consistency.
fix: improve the suggestion on future not awaited
Considering the following code
```rust
fn foo() -> u8 {
async fn async_fn() -> u8 { 22 }
async_fn()
}
fn main() {}
```
the error generated before this commit from the compiler is
```
➜ rust git:(macros/async_fn_suggestion) ✗ rustc test.rs --edition 2021
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> test.rs:4:5
|
1 | fn foo() -> u8 {
| -- expected `u8` because of return type
...
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `u8`, found opaque type
|
= note: expected type `u8`
found opaque type `impl Future<Output = u8>`
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
4 | async_fn().await
| ++++++
error: aborting due to previous error
```
In this case the error is nor perfect, and can confuse the user that do not know that the opaque type is the future.
So this commit will propose (and conclude the work start in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80658)
to change the string `opaque type` to `future` when applicable and also remove the Expected vs Received note by adding a more specific one regarding the async function that return a future type.
So the new error emitted by the compiler is
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> test.rs:4:5
|
1 | fn foo() -> u8 {
| -- expected `u8` because of return type
...
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `u8`, found future
|
note: calling an async function returns a future
--> test.rs:4:5
|
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
4 | async_fn().await
| ++++++
error: aborting due to previous error
```
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80658
It remains to rework the case described in the following issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/107899 but I think this deserves its own PR after we discuss a little bit how to handle these kinds of cases.
r? `@eholk`
`@rustbot` label +I-async-nominated
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
Considering the following code
```rust
fn foo() -> u8 {
async fn async_fn() -> u8 { 22 }
async_fn()
}
fn main() {}
```
the error generated before this commit from the compiler is
```
➜ rust git:(macros/async_fn_suggestion) ✗ rustc test.rs --edition 2021
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> test.rs:4:5
|
1 | fn foo() -> u8 {
| -- expected `u8` because of return type
...
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `u8`, found opaque type
|
= note: expected type `u8`
found opaque type `impl Future<Output = u8>`
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
4 | async_fn().await
| ++++++
error: aborting due to previous error
```
In this case the error is nor perfect, and can confuse the user
that do not know that the opaque type is the future.
So this commit will propose (and conclude the work start in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80658)
to change the string `opaque type` to `future` when applicable
and also remove the Expected vs Received note by adding a more
specific one regarding the async function that return a future type.
So the new error emitted by the compiler is
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> test.rs:4:5
|
1 | fn foo() -> u8 {
| -- expected `u8` because of return type
...
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `u8`, found future
|
note: calling an async function returns a future
--> test.rs:4:5
|
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
4 | async_fn().await
| ++++++
error: aborting due to previous error
```
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
Avoid exposing type parameters and implementation details sourced from macro expansions
Fixes#107745.
~~I would like to **request some guidance** for this issue, because I don't think this is a good fix (a band-aid at best).~~
### The Problem
The code
```rust
fn main() {
println!("{:?}", []);
}
```
gets desugared into (`rustc +nightly --edition=2018 issue-107745.rs -Z unpretty=hir`):
```rust
#[prelude_import]
use std::prelude::rust_2018::*;
#[macro_use]
extern crate std;
fn main() {
{
::std::io::_print(<#[lang = "format_arguments"]>::new_v1(&["",
"\n"], &[<#[lang = "format_argument"]>::new_debug(&[])]));
};
}
```
so the diagnostics code tries to be as specific and helpful as possible, and I think it finds that `[]` needs a type parameter and so does `new_debug`. But since `[]` doesn't have an origin for the type parameter definition, it points to `new_debug` instead and leaks the internal implementation detail since all `[]` has is an type inference variable.
### ~~The Bad Fix~~
~~This PR currently tries to fix the problem by bypassing the generated function `<#[lang = "format_argument"]>::new_debug` to avoid its generic parameter (I think it is auto-generated from the argument `[_; 0]`?) from getting collected as an `InsertableGenericArg`. This is problematic because it also prevents the help from getting displayed.~~
~~I think this fix is not ideal and hard-codes the format generated code pattern, but I can't think of a better fix. I have tried asking on Zulip but no responses there yet.~~
Fix problem noticed in PR106859 with char -> u8 suggestion
HN reader `@ayosec` noticed that my #106859 a few weeks back, malfunctions if you have a Unicode escape, the code suggested b'\u{0}' if you tried to use '\u{0}' where a byte should be, when of course b'\u{0}' is not a byte literal, regardless of the codepoint you can't write Unicode escapes in a byte literal at all.
My proposed fix here just checks that the "character" you wrote is fewer than 5 bytes, thus allowing \x7F and similar escapes but conveniently forbidding even the smallest Unicode escape \u{0} before offering the suggestion as before.
I have provided an updated test which includes examples which do and don't work because of this additional rule.
Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches
Maybe I'm just misinterpreting the wording of the note. The only value I can see in this note is that it points out where the async's opaque future is coming from, but the way it's doing it is misleading IMO.
For example:
```rust
note: while checking the return type of the `async fn`
--> $DIR/dont-suggest-missing-await.rs:7:24
|
LL | async fn make_u32() -> u32 {
| ^^^ checked the `Output` of this `async fn`, found opaque type
```
We point at the type `u32` in the HIR, but then say "found opaque type". We also say "while checking"... but we're typechecking a totally different function when we get this type mismatch!
r? ``@estebank`` but feel free to reassign and/or take your time reviewing this. I'd be inclined to also discuss reworking the presentation of this type mismatch to restore some of these labels in a way that makes it more clear what it's trying to point out.
Use `can_eq` to compare types for default assoc type error
This correctly handles inference variables like `{integer}`. I had to move all of this `note_and_explain` code to `rustc_infer`, it made no sense for it to be in `rustc_middle` anyways.
The commits are reviewed separately.
Fixes#106968
use `LocalDefId` instead of `HirId` in trait resolution to simplify the obligation clause resolution
This commit introduces a refactoring suggested by `@lcnr` to simplify the obligation clause resolution.
This is just the first PR that introduces a type of refactoring, but others PRs will follow this to introduce name changing to change from the variable name from `body_id` to something else.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/104827
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
`@rustbot` r? `@lcnr`
- On compiler-error's suggestion of moving this lower down the stack,
along the path of `report_mismatched_types()`, which is used
by `rustc_hir_analysis` and `rustc_hir_typeck`.
- update ui tests, add test
- add suggestions for references to fn pointers
- modify `TypeErrCtxt::same_type_modulo_infer` to take `T: relate::Relate` instead of `Ty`
use LocalDefId instead of HirId in trait resolution to simplify
the obligation clause resolution
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
