Port `#[track_caller]` to the new attribute system
r? ``@oli-obk``
depends on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/142493Closesrust-lang/rust#142783
(didn't add a test for this, this situation should simply never come up again, the code was simply wrong. lmk if I should add it, but it won't test something very useful)
Add `#[loop_match]` for improved DFA codegen
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132306
project goal: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/issues/258
This PR adds the `#[loop_match]` attribute, which aims to improve code generation for state machines. For some (very exciting) benchmarks, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/issues/258#issuecomment-2732965199
Currently, a very restricted syntax pattern is accepted. We'd like to get feedback and merge this now before we go too far in a direction that others have concerns with.
## current state
We accept code that looks like this
```rust
#[loop_match]
loop {
state = 'blk: {
match state {
State::A => {
#[const_continue]
break 'blk State::B
}
State::B => { /* ... */ }
/* ... */
}
}
}
```
- a loop should have the same semantics with and without `#[loop_match]`: normal `continue` and `break` continue to work
- `#[const_continue]` is only allowed in loops annotated with `#[loop_match]`
- the loop body needs to have this particular shape (a single assignment to the match scrutinee, with the body a labelled block containing just a match)
## future work
- perform const evaluation on the `break` value
- support more state/scrutinee types
## maybe future work
- allow `continue 'label value` syntax, which `#[const_continue]` could then use.
- allow the match to be on an arbitrary expression (e.g. `State::Initial`)
- attempt to also optimize `break`/`continue` expressions that are not marked with `#[const_continue]`
r? ``@traviscross``
rewrite `optimize` attribute to use new attribute parsing infrastructure
r? ```@oli-obk```
I'm afraid we'll get quite a few of these PRs in the future. If we get a lot of trivial changes I'll start merging multiple into one PR. They should be easy to review :)
Waiting on #138165 first
I'm removing empty identifiers everywhere, because in practice they
always mean "no identifier" rather than "empty identifier". (An empty
identifier is impossible.) It's better to use `Option` to mean "no
identifier" because you then can't forget about the "no identifier"
possibility.
Some specifics:
- When testing an attribute for a single name, the commit uses the
`has_name` method.
- When testing an attribute for multiple names, the commit uses the new
`has_any_name` method.
- When using `match` on an attribute, the match arms now have `Some` on
them.
In the tests, we now avoid printing empty identifiers by not printing
the identifier in the `error:` line at all, instead letting the carets
point out the problem.
They are no longer needed.
This does slightly worsen the error message for a single test, but that
test contains code that is so badly broken that I'm not worried about
it.
The idea is to identify cases of symbols/identifiers that are not
expected to be used. There isn't a perfectly sharp line between "dummy"
and "not dummy", but I think it's useful nonetheless.
