| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
This reduces unhelpful diagnostics down the road.
|
|
instead of trying to normalize them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
unresolved associated types
|
|
This version of odht contains a potential fix for #89085.
|
|
|
|
This just applies the suggested fixes from the compatibility warnings,
leaving any that are in practice spurious in. This is primarily intended to
provide a starting point to identify possible fixes to the migrations (e.g., by
avoiding spurious warnings).
A secondary commit cleans these up where they are false positives (as is true in
many of the cases).
|
|
This just applies the suggested fixes from the compatibility warnings,
leaving any that are in practice spurious in. This is primarily intended to
provide a starting point to identify possible fixes to the migrations (e.g., by
avoiding spurious warnings).
A secondary commit cleans these up where they are false positives (as is true in
many of the cases).
|
|
These were left over in migrations to subtrees, which should generally be treated
as-if it was local.
Also fixes a warning caused by this change.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add initial support for m68k
This patch series adds initial support for m68k making use of the new M68k
backend introduced with LLVM-13. Additional changes will be needed to be
able to actually use the backend for this target.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specifically, ISO/IEC 9899:2018 — better known as "C18" — (and at least
C11, C99 and C89) do not specify the size of `byte` in bits.
Section 3.6 defines "byte" as "addressable unit of data storage" while
section 6.2.5 ("Types") only defines "char" as "large enough to store
any member of the basic execution set" giving it a lower bound of 7 bit
(since there are 96 characters in the basic execution set).
With section 6.5.3.4 paragraph 4 "When sizeof is applied to an operant
that has type char […] the result is 1" you could read this as the size
of `char` in bits being defined as exactly the same as the number of
bits in a byte but it's also valid to read that as an exception.
In general implementations take `char` as the smallest unit of
addressable memory, which for modern byte-addressed architectures is
overwhelmingly 8 bits to the point of this convention being completely
cemented into just about all of our software.
So is any of this actually relevant at all? I hope not. I sincerely hope
that this never, ever comes up.
But if for some reason a poor rustacean is having to interface with C
code running on a Cray X1 that in 2003 is still doing word-addressed
memory with 64-bit words and they trust the docs here blindly it will
blow up in her face. And I'll be truly sorry for her to have to deal
with … all of that.
|
|
Fix debuginfo tests for the latest version of the Windows SDK.
Re-enable the tests that were disabled to fix CI.
Changes:
- Cdb now correctly visualizes enums.
- Cdb doesn't render emoji characters in `OSStr` anymore.
- Cdb doesn't always render `str` correctly (#88840)
|
|
Add `ConstraintCategory::Usage` for handling aggregate construction
In some cases, we emit borrowcheck diagnostics pointing
at a particular field expression in a struct expression
(e.g. `MyStruct { field: my_expr }`). However, this
behavior currently relies on us choosing the
`ConstraintCategory::Boring` with the 'correct' span.
When adding additional variants to `ConstraintCategory`,
(or changing existing usages away from `ConstraintCategory::Boring`),
the current behavior can easily get broken, since a non-boring
constraint will get chosen over a boring one.
To make the diagnostic output less fragile, this commit
adds a `ConstraintCategory::Usage` variant. We use this variant
for the temporary assignments created for each field of
an aggregate we are constructing.
Using this new variant, we can emit a message mentioning
"this usage", emphasizing the fact that the error message
is related to the specific use site (in the struct expression).
This is preparation for additional work on improving NLL error messages
(see #57374)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Querify `FnAbi::of_{fn_ptr,instance}` as `fn_abi_of_{fn_ptr,instance}`.
*Note: opening this PR as draft because it's based on #88499*
This more or less replicates the `LayoutOf::layout_of` setup from #88499, to replace `FnAbi::of_{fn_ptr,instance}` with `FnAbiOf::fn_abi_of_{fn_ptr,instance}`, and also route them through queries (which `layout_of` has used for a while).
The two changes at the use sites (other than the names) are:
* return type is now wrapped in `&'tcx`
* the value *is* interned, which may affect performance
* the `extra_args` list is now an interned `&'tcx ty::List<Ty<'tcx>>`
* should be cheap (it's empty for anything other than C variadics)
Theoretically, a `FnAbiOfHelpers` implementer could choose to keep the `Result<...>` instead of eagerly erroring, but the only existing users of these APIs are codegen backends, so they don't (want to) take advantage of this.
At least miri could make use of this, since it prefers propagating errors (it "just" doesn't use `FnAbi` yet - cc `@RalfJung).`
The way this is done is probably less efficient than what is possible, because the queries handle the correctness-oriented API (i.e. the split into `fn` pointers vs instances), whereas a lower-level query could end up with more reuse between different instances with identical signatures.
r? `@nagisa` cc `@oli-obk` `@bjorn3`
|
|
Convert `debug_assert` to `assert` in `CachingSourceMapView`
I suspect that there's a bug somewhere in this code, which is
leading to the `predicates_of` ICE being seen in #89035
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change `while_let_on_iterator` suggestion to use `by_ref()`
It came up in the discussion #7659 that suggesting `iter.by_ref()` is a clearer suggestion than `&mut iter`. I personally think they're equivalent, but if `by_ref()` is clearer to people then that should be the suggestion.
changelog: Change `while_let_on_iterator` suggestion when using `&mut` to use `by_ref()`
|
|
Gather module items after lowering.
This avoids having a non-local analysis inside lowering.
By implementing `hir_module_items` using a visitor, we make sure that iterations and visitors are consistent.
|
|
installation instructions.
Signed-off-by: Daira Hopwood <daira@jacaranda.org>
|
|
Do not preallocate HirIds
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87234
r? `@petrochenkov`
|
|
sync_cg_clif-2021-09-19
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 10 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #87960 (Suggest replacing an inexisting field for an unmentioned field)
- #88855 (Allow simd_shuffle to accept vectors of any length)
- #88966 (Check for shadowing issues involving block labels)
- #88996 (Fix linting when trailing macro expands to a trailing semi)
- #89017 (fix potential race in AtomicU64 time monotonizer)
- #89021 (Add a separate error for `dyn Trait` in `const fn`)
- #89051 (Add intra-doc links and small changes to `std::os` to be more consistent)
- #89053 (refactor: VecDeques IntoIter fields to private)
- #89055 (Suggest better place to add call parentheses for method expressions wrapped in parentheses)
- #89081 (Fix a typo)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
Newcomers may write `{1, 2, 3}` for making arrays, and the current error
message is not informative enough to quickly convince them what is
needed to fix the error.
This PR implements a diagnostic for this case, and its output looks like
this:
```text
error: this code is interpreted as a block expression, not an array
--> src/lib.rs:1:22
|
1 | const FOO: [u8; 3] = {
| ______________________^
2 | | 1, 2, 3
3 | | };
| |_^
|
= note: to define an array, one would use square brackets instead of curly braces
help: try using [] instead of {}
|
1 | const FOO: [u8; 3] = [
2 | 1, 2, 3
3 | ];
|
```
Fix #87672
|
|
Fix : use struct_dummy
Fix different os messages
|
|
Fix a typo
Removed extra spaces in front of commas
|
|
Suggest better place to add call parentheses for method expressions wrapped in parentheses
I wanted to improve the suggestion a bit to both remove the wrapping parentheses **and** add call parentheses by both calling `suggest_method_call` and using `multipart_suggestion`. But I very quickly ran into a problem where multiple overlapping machine applicable suggestions cannot be properly applied together. So I applied the suggestion from the issue and only added the call parentheses directly after the expression.
Fixes: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/89044
|
|
r=Mark-Simulacrum
refactor: VecDeques IntoIter fields to private
Made the fields of VecDeque's IntoIter private by creating a IntoIter::from(...) function to create a new instance of IntoIter and migrating usage to use IntoIter::from(...).
|
|
Add intra-doc links and small changes to `std::os` to be more consistent
I believe that a few items in `std::os` should be linked. I've also added a basic example in `std::os::windows`.
|
|
WaffleLapkin:separate_error_for_dyn_trait_in_const_fn, r=estebank
Add a separate error for `dyn Trait` in `const fn`
Previously "trait bounds other than `Sized` on const fn parameters are unstable" error was used for both trait bounds (`<T: Trait>`) and trait objects (`dyn Trait`). This was pretty confusing.
This PR adds a separate error for trait objects: "trait objects in const fn are unstable". The error for trait bounds is otherwise intact.
This is follow up to #88907
r? ``@estebank``
``@rustbot`` label: +A-diagnostics
|
|
fix potential race in AtomicU64 time monotonizer
The AtomicU64-based monotonizer introduced in #83093 is incorrect because several threads could try to update the value concurrently and a thread which doesn't have the newest value among all the updates could win.
That bug probably has little real world impact since it doesn't make observed time worse than hardware clocks. The worst case would probably be a thread which has a clock that is behind by several cycles observing several inconsistent fixups, which should be similar to observing the unfiltered backslide in the first place.
New benchmarks, they don't look as good as the original PR but still an improvement compared to the mutex.
I don't know why the contended mutex case is faster now than in the previous benchmarks.
```
actually_monotonic() == true:
test time::tests::instant_contention_01_threads ... bench: 44 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test time::tests::instant_contention_02_threads ... bench: 45 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test time::tests::instant_contention_04_threads ... bench: 45 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test time::tests::instant_contention_08_threads ... bench: 45 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test time::tests::instant_contention_16_threads ... bench: 46 ns/iter (+/- 0)
atomic u64:
test time::tests::instant_contention_01_threads ... bench: 66 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test time::tests::instant_contention_02_threads ... bench: 287 ns/iter (+/- 14)
test time::tests::instant_contention_04_threads ... bench: 296 ns/iter (+/- 43)
test time::tests::instant_contention_08_threads ... bench: 604 ns/iter (+/- 163)
test time::tests::instant_contention_16_threads ... bench: 1,147 ns/iter (+/- 29)
mutex:
test time::tests::instant_contention_01_threads ... bench: 78 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test time::tests::instant_contention_02_threads ... bench: 652 ns/iter (+/- 275)
test time::tests::instant_contention_04_threads ... bench: 900 ns/iter (+/- 32)
test time::tests::instant_contention_08_threads ... bench: 1,927 ns/iter (+/- 62)
test time::tests::instant_contention_16_threads ... bench: 3,748 ns/iter (+/- 146)
```
|
|
Fix linting when trailing macro expands to a trailing semi
When a macro is used in the trailing expression position of a block
(e.g. `fn foo() { my_macro!() }`), we currently parse it as an
expression, rather than a statement. As a result, we ended up
using the `NodeId` of the containing statement as our `lint_node_id`,
even though we don't normally do this for macro calls.
If such a macro expands to an expression with a `#[cfg]` attribute,
then the trailing statement can get removed entirely. This lead to
an ICE, since we were usng the `NodeId` of the expression to emit
a lint.
Ths commit makes us skip updating `lint_node_id` when handling
a macro in trailing expression position. This will cause us to
lint at the closest parent of the macro call.
|
|
Check for shadowing issues involving block labels
|
|
Allow simd_shuffle to accept vectors of any length
cc ``@rust-lang/project-portable-simd`` ``@workingjubilee``
|
|
hkmatsumoto:suggest-inexisting-field-for-unmentioned-field, r=estebank
Suggest replacing an inexisting field for an unmentioned field
Fix #87938
This PR adds a suggestion to replace an inexisting field for an
unmentioned field. Given the following code:
```rust
enum Foo {
Bar { alpha: u8, bravo: u8, charlie: u8 },
}
fn foo(foo: Foo) {
match foo {
Foo::Bar {
alpha,
beta, // `bravo` miswritten as `beta` here.
charlie,
} => todo!(),
}
}
```
the compiler now emits the error messages below.
```text
error[E0026]: variant `Foo::Bar` does not have a field named `beta`
--> src/lib.rs:9:13
|
9 | beta, // `bravo` miswritten as `beta` here.
| ^^^^
| |
| variant `Foo::Bar` does not have this field
| help: `Foo::Bar` has a field named `bravo`: `bravo`
```
Note that this suggestion is available iff the number of inexisting
fields and unmentioned fields are both 1.
|
|
Don't inline OnceCell initialization closures
The more general variant of #89026, originally suggested in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/86898#issuecomment-920138051
|
|
Propagate coercion cause into `try_coerce`
Currently, `coerce_inner` discards its `ObligationCause`
when calling `try_coerce`. This interfers with other
diagnostc improvements I'm working on, since we will lose
the original span by the time the actual coercion occurs.
Additionally, we now use the span of the trailing expression
(rather than the span of the entire function) when performing
a coercion in `check_return_expr`. This currently has no visible
effect on any of the unit tests, but will unblock future
diagnostic improvements.
|
