https://github.com/rust-lang/rust http://git.dreamy.place/mirrors/rust/atom?h=try-perf 2025-08-22T17:55:15+00:00 2025-08-22T17:55:15+00:00 Esteban Küber esteban@kuber.com.ar 2025-08-19T17:49:20+00:00 urn:sha1:049c32797b5f797d5823cdc0e5aaeb0fd68175da When encountering an unmet trait bound, point at local type that doesn't implement the trait: ``` error[E0277]: the trait bound `Bar<T>: Foo` is not satisfied --> $DIR/issue-64855.rs:9:19 | LL | pub struct Bar<T>(<Self as Foo>::Type) where Self: ; | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ unsatisfied trait bound | help: the trait `Foo` is not implemented for `Bar<T>` --> $DIR/issue-64855.rs:9:1 | LL | pub struct Bar<T>(<Self as Foo>::Type) where Self: ; | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ``` 2025-08-19T19:27:10+00:00 Karol Zwolak karolzwolak7@gmail.com 2025-04-28T11:47:25+00:00 urn:sha1:d14b83e378c421dd09320ace833a9d47848e3046 2025-08-04T17:20:07+00:00 Esteban Küber esteban@kuber.com.ar 2025-02-28T23:37:37+00:00 urn:sha1:91e606b715ac4e8f59fac86d42ec2ad23f4ef169 Make suggestions to remove params and super traits tool-only, and make the suggestion span more accurate. ``` error[E0567]: auto traits cannot have generic parameters --> $DIR/auto-trait-validation.rs:6:19 | LL | auto trait Generic<T> {} | -------^^^ | | | auto trait cannot have generic parameters error[E0568]: auto traits cannot have super traits or lifetime bounds --> $DIR/auto-trait-validation.rs:8:20 | LL | auto trait Bound : Copy {} | ----- ^^^^ | | | auto traits cannot have super traits or lifetime bounds ``` ``` error[E0380]: auto traits cannot have associated items --> $DIR/issue-23080.rs:5:8 | LL | unsafe auto trait Trait { | ----- auto traits cannot have associated items LL | fn method(&self) { | ^^^^^^ ``` 2025-07-11T05:35:18+00:00 Matthias Krüger 476013+matthiaskrgr@users.noreply.github.com 2025-07-11T05:35:18+00:00 urn:sha1:3d6eb225e26448b09fdec1ba7222f3e7174c6ac2 `tests/ui`: A New Order [27/N] > [!NOTE] > > Intermediate commits are intended to help review, but will be squashed prior to merge. Some `tests/ui/` housekeeping, to trim down number of tests directly under `tests/ui/`. Part of rust-lang/rust#133895. r? ``@tgross35`` 2025-07-10T13:47:20+00:00 Kivooeo Kivooeo123@gmail.com 2025-07-01T16:46:28+00:00 urn:sha1:3ad95cccf9b3af7e527869a1eb130217971b7a57 2025-07-04T19:45:24+00:00 Kivooeo Kivooeo123@gmail.com 2025-07-01T13:24:12+00:00 urn:sha1:b28806da237176468ab2afae42b51fe43ad416e6 2025-07-01T16:42:20+00:00 Kivooeo Kivooeo123@gmail.com 2025-07-01T16:42:20+00:00 urn:sha1:e9191ec57ee5bdd0961a22fd9852f361a5c97ea0 2025-07-01T13:21:05+00:00 Kivooeo Kivooeo123@gmail.com 2025-07-01T13:21:05+00:00 urn:sha1:986f1c9b692665d4e7388062b8d8536acb0c99fd 2025-04-17T04:25:15+00:00 Matthias Krüger 476013+matthiaskrgr@users.noreply.github.com 2025-04-17T04:25:15+00:00 urn:sha1:0de803c38d33655ed3ec25e237b6c1e2bb4e7426 Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals` Closes #131204 `@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated This will end up conflicting with the test in #138293 so whichever doesn't land first will need updating -- # Stabilization Report ## General design ### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized? [RFC 3695](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695), none. ### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con. None ### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those? None ## Has a call-for-testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received? Yes; only positive feedback was received. ## Implementation quality ### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs) Implemented in [#131034](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131034). ### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature - [Basic usage, including `#[cfg()]`, `cfg!()` and `#[cfg_attr()]`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6d71251cf9e40326461f90f8ff9a7024706aea87/tests/ui/cfg/true-false.rs) - [`--cfg=true/false` on the command line being accessible via `r#true/r#false`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6d71251cf9e40326461f90f8ff9a7024706aea87/tests/ui/cfg/raw-true-false.rs) - [Interaction with the unstable `#[doc(cfg(..))]` feature](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/rustdoc-ui/cfg-boolean-literal.rs) - [Denying `--check-cfg=cfg(true/false)`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/ui/check-cfg/invalid-arguments.rs) - Ensuring `--cfg false` on the command line doesn't change the meaning of `cfg(false)`: `tests/ui/cfg/cmdline-false.rs` - Ensuring both `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)` on the same item result in it being disabled: `tests/ui/cfg/both-true-false.rs` ### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking? The above mentioned issue; it should not block as it interacts with another unstable feature. ### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there? None ### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization - `@clubby789` (RFC) - `@Urgau` (Implementation in rustc) ### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done? `rustdoc`'s unstable`#[doc(cfg(..)]` has been updated to respect it. `cargo` has been updated with a forward compatibility lint to enable supporting it in cargo once stabilized. ## Type system and execution rules ### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist) A few lines to be added to the reference for configuration predicates, specified in the RFC. 2025-04-08T20:06:31+00:00 Vadim Petrochenkov vadim.petrochenkov@gmail.com 2025-04-05T16:19:56+00:00 urn:sha1:b3f75353a237f3623483c1e237be480140a8c3e1