2a10082bcc
Assert that non-extended temporaries and `super let` bindings have scopes This PR clarifies a point of confusion in the compiler: all bodies have an outer temporary drop scope, including `static` and `const` item bodies[^1]. Whenever a temporary should be dropped in its enclosing temporary scope, it should have a temporary scope to be dropped in so that its drop can be scheduled[^2]. As such, I've updated some relevant comments and made `ScopeTree::default_temporary_scope` and `RvalueScopes::temporary_scope` panic when an enclosing temporary scope isn't found instead of allowing potential bugs where potentially-drop-sensitive temporaries are effectively given static lifetimes. Since non-extended `super let` bindings are dropped in their block's enclosing temporary scope, this applies to them as well: the enclosing temporary scope should exist. [^1]: See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/check/region.rs#L773-L778 for non-`fn`/closure bodies. The `this.cx.var_parent = None;` enables [lifetime extension to `'static` lifetimes](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/destructors.html#r-destructors.scope.lifetime-extension.static) and the `ScopeData::Destruction` scope ensures non-extended temporaries are dropped in the body expression's scope. [^2]: For certain borrowed temporaries, drops that don't require running destructors may later be removed by constant promotion. That is unrelated to this PR.
For more information about how rustc works, see the rustc dev guide.