Adopt let_else across the compiler
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 (cc #87335).
The PR also updates the syn crate because the currently used version of the crate doesn't support `let_else` syntax yet.
Note: Generally I'm the person who *removes* usages of unstable features from the compiler, not adds more usages of them, but in this instance I think it hopefully helps the feature get stabilized sooner and in a better state. I have written a [comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87335#issuecomment-944846205) on the tracking issue about my experience and what I feel could be improved before stabilization of `let_else`.
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.
Add `const_eval_select` intrinsic
Adds an intrinsic that calls a given function when evaluated at compiler time, but generates a call to another function when called at runtime.
See https://github.com/rust-lang/const-eval/issues/7 for previous discussion.
r? `@oli-obk.`
Prevent error reporting from outputting a recursion error if it finds an ambiguous trait impl during suggestions
Closes#89275
This fixes the compiler reporting a recursion error during another already in progress error by trying to make a conversion method suggestion and encounters ambiguous trait implementations that can convert a the original type into a type that can then be recursively converted into itself via another method in the trait.
Updated OverflowError struct to be an enum so I could differentiate between passes - it's no longer a ZST but I don't think that should be a problem as they only generate when there's an error in compiling code anyway
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #89298 (Issue 89193 - Fix ICE when using `usize` and `isize` with SIMD gathers )
- #89461 (Add `deref_into_dyn_supertrait` lint.)
- #89477 (Move items related to computing diffs to a separate file)
- #89559 (RustWrapper: adapt for LLVM API change)
- #89585 (Emit item no type error even if type inference fails)
- #89596 (Make cfg imply doc(cfg))
- #89615 (Add InferCtxt::with_opaque_type_inference to get_body_with_borrowck_facts)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Add `deref_into_dyn_supertrait` lint.
Initial implementation of #89460. Resolves#89190.
Maybe also worth a beta backport if necessary.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Consider unfulfilled obligations in binop errors
When encountering a binop where the types would have been accepted, if
all the predicates had been fulfilled, include information about the
predicates and suggest appropriate `#[derive]`s if possible.
Fix#84515.
When encountering a binop where the types would have been accepted, if
all the predicates had been fulfilled, include information about the
predicates and suggest appropriate `#[derive]`s if possible.
Point at trait(s) that needs to be `impl`emented.
Move generic error message to separate branches
This decomposes an error message in generic constants into more specific branches, for better
readability.
r? ``@lcnr``
Fixed numerus of error message
When there are redundant trait requirements and these are hidden, a message is generated by the following code snippet:
`format!("{} redundant requirements hidden", count)`
But if there is only a single hidden requirement, it will still print this message in plural instead of singular.
Correctly handle supertraits for min_specialization
Supertraits of specialization markers could circumvent checks for
min_specialization. Elaborating predicates prevents this.
r? ````@nikomatsakis````
Make diangostic item naming consistent
Right now there is about a 50/50 split of naming diagnostic items as `vec_type` vs `Vec`. So it is hard to guess a diagnostic item name with confidence. I know it's not great to change these retroactively, but I think it will be much easier to maintain consistency after consistency is established.
