about summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/compiler/rustc_ast_lowering/src/expr.rs
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorLines
2025-09-08change end to lastJeremy Smart-5/+24
2025-08-25add span to struct pattern rest (..)Valdemar Erk-3/+3
2025-08-14Pass the target type down to `parse_attribute_list`Jonathan Brouwer-8/+9
2025-08-09remove `P`Deadbeef-9/+8
2025-08-04Port `#[coroutine]` to the new attribute systemSasha Pourcelot-12/+6
Related to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131229#issue-2565886367.
2025-07-31remove rustc_attr_data_structuresJana Dönszelmann-2/+2
2025-07-28Complete span lowering.Camille GILLOT-11/+26
2025-07-13Auto merge of #143213 - dianne:lower-cond-tweaks, r=cjgillotbors-41/+4
de-duplicate condition scoping logic between AST→HIR lowering and `ScopeTree` construction There was some overlap between `rustc_ast_lowering::LoweringContext::lower_cond` and `rustc_hir_analysis::check::region::resolve_expr`, so I've removed the former and migrated its logic to the latter, with some simplifications. Consequences: - For `while` and `if` expressions' `let`-chains, this changes the `HirId`s for the `&&`s to properly correspond to their AST nodes. This is how guards were handled already. - This makes match guards share previously-duplicated logic with `if`/`while` expressions. This will also be used by guard pattern[^1] guards. - Aside from legacy syntax extensions (e.g. some builtin macros) that directly feed AST to the compiler, it's currently impossible to put attributes directly on `&&` operators in `let` chains[^2]. Nonetheless, attributes on `&&` operators in `let` chains in `if`/`while` expression conditions are no longer silently ignored and will be lowered. - This no longer wraps conditions in `DropTemps`, so the HIR and THIR will be slightly smaller. - `DesugaringKind::CondTemporary` is now gone. It's no longer applied to any spans, and all uses of it were dead since they were made to account for `if` and `while` being desugared to `match` on a boolean scrutinee. - Should be a marginal perf improvement beyond that due to leveraging [`ScopeTree` construction](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/5e749eb66f93ee998145399fbdde337e57cd72ef/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/check/region.rs#L312-L355)'s clever handling of `&&` and `||`: - This removes some unnecessary terminating scopes that were placed around top-level `&&` and `||` operators in conditions. When lowered to MIR, logical operator chains don't create intermediate boolean temporaries, so there's no temporary to drop. The linked snippet handles wrapping the operands in terminating scopes as necessary, in case they create temporaries. - The linked snippet takes care of letting `let` temporaries live and terminating other operands, so we don't need separate traversals of `&&` chains for that. [^1]: rust-lang/rust#129967 [^2]: Case-by-case, here's my justification: `#[attr] e1 && e2` applies the attribute to `e1`. In `#[attr] (e1 && e2)` , the attribute is on the parentheses in the AST, plus it'd fail to parse if `e1` or `e2` contains a `let`. In `#[attr] expands_to_let_chain!()`, the attribute would already be ignored (rust-lang/rust#63221) and it'd fail to parse anyway; even if the expansion site is a condition, the expansion wouldn't be parsed with `Restrictions::ALLOW_LET`. If it *was* allowed, the notion of a "reparse context" from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61733#issuecomment-509626449 would be necessary in order to make `let`-chains left-associative; multiple places in the compiler assume they are.
2025-07-05de-duplicate condition scoping logicdianne-41/+4
2025-06-30Introduce `ByteSymbol`.Nicholas Nethercote-15/+9
It's like `Symbol` but for byte strings. The interner is now used for both `Symbol` and `ByteSymbol`. E.g. if you intern `"dog"` and `b"dog"` you'll get a `Symbol` and a `ByteSymbol` with the same index and the characters will only be stored once. The motivation for this is to eliminate the `Arc`s in `ast::LitKind`, to make `ast::LitKind` impl `Copy`, and to avoid the need to arena-allocate `ast::LitKind` in HIR. The latter change reduces peak memory by a non-trivial amount on literal-heavy benchmarks such as `deep-vector` and `tuple-stress`. `Encoder`, `Decoder`, `SpanEncoder`, and `SpanDecoder` all get some changes so that they can handle normal strings and byte strings. This change does slow down compilation of programs that use `include_bytes!` on large files, because the contents of those files are now interned (hashed). This makes `include_bytes!` more similar to `include_str!`, though `include_bytes!` contents still aren't escaped, and hashing is still much cheaper than escaping.
2025-06-24Rewrite #[track_caller]Jana Dönszelmann-1/+2
2025-06-18Allow storing `format_args!()` in `let`.Mara Bos-6/+6
This uses `super let` to allow let f = format_args!("Hello {}", world); println!("{f}"); to work.
2025-06-12introduce new lint infraJana Dönszelmann-9/+8
lint on duplicates during attribute parsing To do this we stuff them in the diagnostic context to be emitted after hir is constructed
2025-06-03Add `iter` macroOli Scherer-7/+8
This adds an `iter!` macro that can be used to create movable generators. This also adds a yield_expr feature so the `yield` keyword can be used within iter! macro bodies. This was needed because several unstable features each need `yield` expressions, so this allows us to stabilize them separately from any individual feature. Co-authored-by: Oli Scherer <github35764891676564198441@oli-obk.de> Co-authored-by: Jieyou Xu <jieyouxu@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Travis Cross <tc@traviscross.com>
2025-04-28We always use the current item as parent, so no need to pass itOli Scherer-2/+1
2025-04-15Rollup merge of #138374 - celinval:issue-136925-const-contract, ↵Stuart Cook-5/+9
r=compiler-errors,oli-obk,RalfJung Enable contracts for const functions Use `const_eval_select!()` macro to enable contract checking only at runtime. The existing contract logic relies on closures, which are not supported in constant functions. This commit also removes one level of indirection for ensures clauses since we no longer build a closure around the ensures predicate. Resolves #136925 **Call-out:** This is still a draft PR since CI is broken due to a new warning message for unreachable code when the bottom of the function is indeed unreachable. It's not clear to me why the warning wasn't triggered before. r? ```@compiler-errors```
2025-04-08Fix unreachable expression warningCelina G. Val-2/+1
Invert the order that we pass the arguments to the `contract_check_ensures` function to avoid the warning when the tail of the function is unreachable. Note that the call itself is also unreachable, but we have already handled that case by ignoring unreachable call for contract calls.
2025-04-07Enable contracts for const functionsCelina G. Val-4/+9
Use `const_eval_select!()` macro to enable contract checking only at runtime. The existing contract logic relies on closures, which are not supported in constant functions. This commit also removes one level of indirection for ensures clauses, however, it currently has a spurious warning message when the bottom of the function is unreachable.
2025-04-06Rollup merge of #139391 - TaKO8Ki:check-if-merged-attrs-list-is-empty, ↵Guillaume Gomez-7/+9
r=jdonszelmann Check if merged attributes list is empty in expr Fixes #139373 In the example code, an [`UnrecognizedReprHint`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6b5ccfc87f59ab017032e430d4d358b4989735da/compiler/rustc_attr_parsing/src/attributes/repr.rs#L155) error is output, and the list of merged attributes becomes empty. This causes a [panic](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6b5ccfc87f59ab017032e430d4d358b4989735da/compiler/rustc_ast_lowering/src/lib.rs#L618) to occur. So, it's necessary to check if merged attributes list is empty as other functions do. ref: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6b5ccfc87f59ab017032e430d4d358b4989735da/compiler/rustc_ast_lowering/src/lib.rs#L896
2025-04-05check if merged attributes list is emptyTakayuki Maeda-7/+9
2025-04-03Tighten up assignment operator representations.Nicholas Nethercote-1/+5
In the AST, currently we use `BinOpKind` within `ExprKind::AssignOp` and `AssocOp::AssignOp`, even though this allows some nonsensical combinations. E.g. there is no `&&=` operator. Likewise for HIR and THIR. This commit introduces `AssignOpKind` which only includes the ten assignable operators, and uses it in `ExprKind::AssignOp` and `AssocOp::AssignOp`. (And does similar things for `hir::ExprKind` and `thir::ExprKind`.) This avoids the possibility of nonsensical combinations, as seen by the removal of the `bug!` case in `lang_item_for_binop`. The commit is mostly plumbing, including: - Adds an `impl From<AssignOpKind> for BinOpKind` (AST) and `impl From<AssignOp> for BinOp` (MIR/THIR). - `BinOpCategory` can now be created from both `BinOpKind` and `AssignOpKind`. - Replaces the `IsAssign` type with `Op`, which has more information and a few methods. - `suggest_swapping_lhs_and_rhs`: moves the condition to the call site, it's easier that way. - `check_expr_inner`: had to factor out some code into a separate method. I'm on the fence about whether avoiding the nonsensical combinations is worth the extra code.
2025-03-22Auto merge of #136974 - m-ou-se:fmt-options-64-bit, r=scottmcmbors-5/+0
Reduce FormattingOptions to 64 bits This is part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/99012 This reduces FormattingOptions from 6-7 machine words (384 bits on 64-bit platforms, 224 bits on 32-bit platforms) to just 64 bits (a single register on 64-bit platforms). Before: ```rust pub struct FormattingOptions { flags: u32, // only 6 bits used fill: char, align: Option<Alignment>, width: Option<usize>, precision: Option<usize>, } ``` After: ```rust pub struct FormattingOptions { /// Bits: /// - 0-20: fill character (21 bits, a full `char`) /// - 21: `+` flag /// - 22: `-` flag /// - 23: `#` flag /// - 24: `0` flag /// - 25: `x?` flag /// - 26: `X?` flag /// - 27: Width flag (if set, the width field below is used) /// - 28: Precision flag (if set, the precision field below is used) /// - 29-30: Alignment (0: Left, 1: Right, 2: Center, 3: Unknown) /// - 31: Always set to 1 flags: u32, /// Width if width flag above is set. Otherwise, always 0. width: u16, /// Precision if precision flag above is set. Otherwise, always 0. precision: u16, } ```
2025-03-18Refactor YieldKind so postfix yield must have an expressionEric Holk-1/+1
2025-03-14Preserve yield position during pretty printingEric Holk-1/+1
2025-03-12Reduce FormattingOptions to 64 bits.Mara Bos-5/+0
2025-03-10Share implementation of expr_u{16,32,size}.Mara Bos-21/+8
2025-03-10Limit formatting width and precision to 16 bits.Mara Bos-0/+11
2025-03-07Rollup merge of #137977 - nnethercote:less-kw-Empty-1, r=spastorinoMatthias Krüger-2/+2
Reduce `kw::Empty` usage, part 1 This PR fixes some confusing `kw::Empty` usage, fixing a crash test along the way. r? ```@spastorino```
2025-03-07Rollup merge of #134797 - spastorino:ergonomic-ref-counting-1, r=nikomatsakisMatthias Krüger-0/+5
Ergonomic ref counting This is an experimental first version of ergonomic ref counting. This first version implements most of the RFC but doesn't implement any of the optimizations. This was left for following iterations. RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3680 Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132290 Project goal: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/issues/107 r? ```@nikomatsakis```
2025-03-07Pass `Option<Symbol>` to `def_path_data`/`create_def` methods.Nicholas Nethercote-2/+2
It's clearer than using `kw::Empty` to mean `None`.
2025-03-06Implement .use keyword as an alias of cloneSantiago Pastorino-0/+5
2025-03-06Add the yield_expr featureEric Holk-21/+14
2025-03-01Rollup merge of #137742 - mu001999-contrib:fix-137708, r=compiler-errorsMatthias Krüger-2/+5
unconditionally lower match arm even if it's unneeded for never pattern in match fixes #137708 Lowering arm body is skipped when lowering match arm with never pattern, but we may need the HirId for DefId in the body in later passes. And then we got the ICE `No HirId for DefId`. Fixes this by lowering the arm body even if it's unneeded for never pattern in match, so that we can generate HirId and use it then. r? `@compiler-errors`
2025-02-28Unconditionally lower match arm even if it's unneeded for never pattern in matchMu001999-2/+5
2025-02-24Introduce new parsing infrastructure and types for parsed attributesJana Dönszelmann-9/+9
fixup docs in parser
2025-02-10Don't ICE when failing to lower contracts for associated impl itemsMichael Goulet-10/+11
2025-02-08Rustfmtbjorn3-9/+12
2025-02-06Auto merge of #136471 - safinaskar:parallel, r=SparrowLiibors-11/+11
tree-wide: parallel: Fully removed all `Lrc`, replaced with `Arc` tree-wide: parallel: Fully removed all `Lrc`, replaced with `Arc` This is continuation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132282 . I'm pretty sure I did everything right. In particular, I searched all occurrences of `Lrc` in submodules and made sure that they don't need replacement. There are other possibilities, through. We can define `enum Lrc<T> { Rc(Rc<T>), Arc(Arc<T>) }`. Or we can make `Lrc` a union and on every clone we can read from special thread-local variable. Or we can add a generic parameter to `Lrc` and, yes, this parameter will be everywhere across all codebase. So, if you think we should take some alternative approach, then don't merge this PR. But if it is decided to stick with `Arc`, then, please, merge. cc "Parallel Rustc Front-end" ( https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/113349 ) r? SparrowLii `@rustbot` label WG-compiler-parallel
2025-02-05Rollup merge of #128045 - pnkfelix:rustc-contracts, r=oli-obkLeón Orell Valerian Liehr-4/+31
#[contracts::requires(...)] + #[contracts::ensures(...)] cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/128044 Updated contract support: attribute syntax for preconditions and postconditions, implemented via a series of desugarings that culminates in: 1. a compile-time flag (`-Z contract-checks`) that, similar to `-Z ub-checks`, attempts to ensure that the decision of enabling/disabling contract checks is delayed until the end user program is compiled, 2. invocations of lang-items that handle invoking the precondition, building a checker for the post-condition, and invoking that post-condition checker at the return sites for the function, and 3. intrinsics for the actual evaluation of pre- and post-condition predicates that third-party verification tools can intercept and reinterpret for their own purposes (e.g. creating shims of behavior that abstract away the function body and replace it solely with the pre- and post-conditions). Known issues: * My original intent, as described in the MCP (https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/759) was to have a rustc-prefixed attribute namespace (like rustc_contracts::requires). But I could not get things working when I tried to do rewriting via a rustc-prefixed builtin attribute-macro. So for now it is called `contracts::requires`. * Our attribute macro machinery does not provide direct support for attribute arguments that are parsed like rust expressions. I spent some time trying to add that (e.g. something that would parse the attribute arguments as an AST while treating the remainder of the items as a token-tree), but its too big a lift for me to undertake. So instead I hacked in something approximating that goal, by semi-trivially desugaring the token-tree attribute contents into internal AST constucts. This may be too fragile for the long-term. * (In particular, it *definitely* breaks when you try to add a contract to a function like this: `fn foo1(x: i32) -> S<{ 23 }> { ... }`, because its token-tree based search for where to inject the internal AST constructs cannot immediately see that the `{ 23 }` is within a generics list. I think we can live for this for the short-term, i.e. land the work, and continue working on it while in parallel adding a new attribute variant that takes a token-tree attribute alongside an AST annotation, which would completely resolve the issue here.) * the *intent* of `-Z contract-checks` is that it behaves like `-Z ub-checks`, in that we do not prematurely commit to including or excluding the contract evaluation in upstream crates (most notably, `core` and `std`). But the current test suite does not actually *check* that this is the case. Ideally the test suite would be extended with a multi-crate test that explores the matrix of enabling/disabling contracts on both the upstream lib and final ("leaf") bin crates.
2025-02-03Desugars contract into the internal AST extensionsFelix S. Klock II-17/+31
Check ensures on early return due to Try / Yeet Expand these two expressions to include a call to contract checking
2025-02-03Express contracts as part of function header and lower it to the contract ↵Celina G. Val-1/+14
lang items includes post-developed commit: do not suggest internal-only keywords as corrections to parse failures. includes post-developed commit: removed tabs that creeped in into rustfmt tool source code. includes post-developed commit, placating rustfmt self dogfooding. includes post-developed commit: add backquotes to prevent markdown checking from trying to treat an attr as a markdown hyperlink/ includes post-developed commit: fix lowering to keep contracts from being erroneously inherited by nested bodies (like closures). Rebase Conflicts: - compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/diagnostics.rs - compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/item.rs - compiler/rustc_span/src/hygiene.rs Remove contracts keywords from diagnostic messages
2025-02-03tree-wide: parallel: Fully removed all `Lrc`, replaced with `Arc`Askar Safin-11/+11
2025-01-30implement unstable `new_range` featurePeter Jaszkowiak-7/+28
for RFC 3550, tracking issue #123741
2025-01-29Eliminate PatKind::PathOli Scherer-1/+5
2025-01-28Refactor FnKind variant to hold &FnCelina G. Val-2/+2
2025-01-22Enforce that all spans are lowered in ast loweringOli Scherer-1/+1
2025-01-08Exhaustively handle expressions in patternsOli Scherer-23/+28
2024-12-18Re-export more `rustc_span::symbol` things from `rustc_span`.Nicholas Nethercote-2/+1
`rustc_span::symbol` defines some things that are re-exported from `rustc_span`, such as `Symbol` and `sym`. But it doesn't re-export some closely related things such as `Ident` and `kw`. So you can do `use rustc_span::{Symbol, sym}` but you have to do `use rustc_span::symbol::{Ident, kw}`, which is inconsistent for no good reason. This commit re-exports `Ident`, `kw`, and `MacroRulesNormalizedIdent`, and changes many `rustc_span::symbol::` qualifiers in `compiler/` to `rustc_span::`. This is a 200+ net line of code reduction, mostly because many files with two `use rustc_span` items can be reduced to one.
2024-12-12Add unwrap_unsafe_binder and wrap_unsafe_binder macro operatorsMichael Goulet-0/+8
2024-12-09Introduce `default_field_values` featureEsteban Küber-11/+8
Initial implementation of `#[feature(default_field_values]`, proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3681. Support default fields in enum struct variant Allow default values in an enum struct variant definition: ```rust pub enum Bar { Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Allow using `..` without a base on an enum struct variant ```rust Bar::Foo { .. } ``` `#[derive(Default)]` doesn't account for these as it is still gating `#[default]` only being allowed on unit variants. Support `#[derive(Default)]` on enum struct variants with all defaulted fields ```rust pub enum Bar { #[default] Foo { bar: S = S, baz: i32 = 42 + 3, } } ``` Check for missing fields in typeck instead of mir_build. Expand test with `const` param case (needs `generic_const_exprs` enabled). Properly instantiate MIR const The following works: ```rust struct S<A> { a: Vec<A> = Vec::new(), } S::<i32> { .. } ``` Add lint for default fields that will always fail const-eval We *allow* this to happen for API writers that might want to rely on users' getting a compile error when using the default field, different to the error that they would get when the field isn't default. We could change this to *always* error instead of being a lint, if we wanted. This will *not* catch errors for partially evaluated consts, like when the expression relies on a const parameter. Suggestions when encountering `Foo { .. }` without `#[feature(default_field_values)]`: - Suggest adding a base expression if there are missing fields. - Suggest enabling the feature if all the missing fields have optional values. - Suggest removing `..` if there are no missing fields.