| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Check ABI target compatibility for function pointers
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130260
Related tracking issue: #87678
Compatibility of an ABI for a target was previously only performed on function definitions and `extern` blocks. This PR adds it also to function pointers to be consistent.
This might have broken some of the `tests/ui/` depending on the platform, so a try run seems like a good idea.
Also this might break existing code, because we now emit extra errors. Does this require a crater run?
# Example
```rust
// build with: --target=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
// These raise E0570
extern "thiscall" fn foo() {}
extern "thiscall" { fn bar() }
// This did not raise any error
fn baz(f: extern "thiscall" fn()) { f() }
```
# Open Questions
* [x] Should this report a future incompatibility warning like #87678 ?
* [ ] Is this the best place to perform the check?
|
|
Add intrinsics `fmuladd{f16,f32,f64,f128}`. This computes `(a * b) +
c`, to be fused if the code generator determines that (i) the target
instruction set has support for a fused operation, and (ii) that the
fused operation is more efficient than the equivalent, separate pair
of `mul` and `add` instructions.
https://llvm.org/docs/LangRef.html#llvm-fmuladd-intrinsic
MIRI support is included for f32 and f64.
The codegen_cranelift uses the `fma` function from libc, which is a
correct implementation, but without the desired performance semantic. I
think this requires an update to cranelift to expose a suitable
instruction in its IR.
I have not tested with codegen_gcc, but it should behave the same
way (using `fma` from libc).
|
|
Retire the `unnamed_fields` feature for now
`#![feature(unnamed_fields)]` was implemented in part in #115131 and #115367, however work on that feature has (afaict) stalled and in the mean time there have been some concerns raised (e.g.[^1][^2]) about whether `unnamed_fields` is worthwhile to have in the language, especially in its current desugaring. Because it represents a compiler implementation burden including a new kind of anonymous ADT and additional complication to field selection, and is quite prone to bugs today, I'm choosing to remove the feature.
However, since I'm not one to really write a bunch of words, I'm specifically *not* going to de-RFC this feature. This PR essentially *rolls back* the state of this feature to "RFC accepted but not yet implemented"; however if anyone wants to formally unapprove the RFC from the t-lang side, then please be my guest. I'm just not totally willing to summarize the various language-facing reasons for why this feature is or is not worthwhile, since I'm coming from the compiler side mostly.
Fixes #117942
Fixes #121161
Fixes #121263
Fixes #121299
Fixes #121722
Fixes #121799
Fixes #126969
Fixes #131041
Tracking:
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49804
[^1]: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/Unnamed.20struct.2Funion.20fields
[^2]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49804#issuecomment-1972619108
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This introduce an additional collection of opaques on HIR, as they can no
longer be listed using the free item list.
|
|
Use wide pointers consistenly across the compiler
This PR replace every use of "fat pointer" for the more recent "wide pointer" terminology.
Since some time T-lang as preferred the "wide pointer" terminology, as can be seen on [the last RFCs](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Arust-lang%2Frfcs+%22wide+pointer%22&type=code), on some [lints](https://doc.rust-lang.org/rustc/lints/listing/warn-by-default.html#ambiguous-wide-pointer-comparisons), but also in [the reference](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/expressions/operator-expr.html?highlight=wide%20pointer#pointer-to-pointer-cast).
Currently we have a [mix of both](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Arust-lang%2Frust+%22wide+pointer%22&type=code) (including in error messages), which isn't great, but with this PR no more.
r? `@jieyouxu` (feel free to re-roll)
|
|
|
|
Refactoring to `OpaqueTyOrigin`
Pulled out of a larger PR that uses these changes to do cross-crate encoding of opaque origin, so we can use them for edition 2024 migrations. These changes should be self-explanatory on their own, tho 😄
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
avoid `{type error}` being leaked in user-facing messages,
particularly when using the `adt_const_params` feature
|
|
|
|
This check was previously only performed on functions not function pointers.
Co-authored-by: Folkert <folkert@folkertdev.nl>
|
|
|
|
Disallow hidden references to mutable static
Closes #123060
Tracking:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123758
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rescope temp lifetime in if-let into IfElse with migration lint
Tracking issue #124085
This PR shortens the temporary lifetime to cover only the pattern matching and consequent branch of a `if let`.
At the expression location, means that the lifetime is shortened from previously the deepest enclosing block or statement in Edition 2021. This warrants an Edition change.
Coming with the Edition change, this patch also implements an edition lint to warn about the change and a safe rewrite suggestion to preserve the 2021 semantics in most cases.
Related to #103108.
Related crater runs: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/129466.
|
|
Fix `clippy::useless_conversion`
Self-explanatory. Probably the last clippy change I'll actually put up since this is the only other one I've actually seen in the wild.
|
|
Simplify some nested `if` statements
Applies some but not all instances of `clippy::collapsible_if`. Some ended up looking worse afterwards, though, so I left those out. Also applies instances of `clippy::collapsible_else_if`
Review with whitespace disabled please.
|
|
Remove needless returns detected by clippy in the compiler
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
apply rules by span edition
|
|
|
|
|
|
adetaylor:arbitrary-self-types-pointers-feature-gate, r=wesleywiser
Arbitrary self types v2: pointers feature gate.
The main `arbitrary_self_types` feature gate will shortly be reused for a new version of arbitrary self types which we are amending per [this RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3519-arbitrary-self-types-v2.md). The main amendments are:
* _do_ support `self` types which can't safely implement `Deref`
* do _not_ support generic `self` types
* do _not_ support raw pointers as `self` types.
This PR relates to the last of those bullet points: this strips pointer support from the current `arbitrary_self_types` feature. We expect this to cause some amount of breakage for crates using this unstable feature to allow raw pointer self types. If that's the case, we want to know about it, and we want crate authors to know of the upcoming changes.
For now, this can be resolved by adding the new
`arbitrary_self_types_pointers` feature to such crates. If we determine that use of raw pointers as self types is common, then we may maintain that as an unstable feature even if we come to stabilize the rest of the `arbitrary_self_types` support in future. If we don't hear that this PR is causing breakage, then perhaps we don't need it at all, even behind an unstable feature gate.
[Tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874)
This is [step 4 of the plan outlined here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874#issuecomment-2122179688)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stop storing a special inner body for the coroutine by-move body for async closures
...and instead, just synthesize an item which is treated mostly normally by the MIR pipeline.
This PR does a few things:
* We synthesize a new `DefId` for the by-move body of a closure, which has its `mir_built` fed with the output of the `ByMoveBody` MIR transformation, and some other relevant queries.
* This has the `DefKind::ByMoveBody`, which we use to distinguish it from "real" bodies (that come from HIR) which need to be borrowck'd. Introduce `TyCtxt::is_synthetic_mir` to skip over `mir_borrowck` which is called by `mir_promoted`; borrowck isn't really possible to make work ATM since it heavily relies being called on a body generated from HIR, and is redundant by the construction of the by-move-body.
* Remove the special `PassManager` hacks for handling the inner `by_move_body` stored within the coroutine's mir body. Instead, this body is fed like a regular MIR body, so it's goes through all of the `tcx.*_mir` stages normally (build -> promoted -> ...etc... -> optimized) ✨.
* Remove the `InstanceKind::ByMoveBody` shim, since now we have a "regular" def id, we can just use `InstanceKind::Item`. This also allows us to remove the corresponding hacks from codegen, such as in `fn_sig_for_fn_abi` ✨.
Notable remarks:
* ~~I know it's kind of weird to be using `DefKind::Closure` here, since it's not a distinct closure but just a new MIR body. I don't believe it really matters, but I could also use a different `DefKind`... maybe one that we could use for synthetic MIR bodies in general?~~ edit: We're doing this now.
|
|
The main `arbitrary_self_types` feature gate will shortly be reused for
a new version of arbitrary self types which we are amending per [this
RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/3519-arbitrary-self-types-v2.md).
The main amendments are:
* _do_ support `self` types which can't safely implement `Deref`
* do _not_ support generic `self` types
* do _not_ support raw pointers as `self` types.
This PR relates to the last of those bullet points: this strips pointer
support from the current `arbitrary_self_types` feature.
We expect this to cause some amount of breakage for crates using this
unstable feature to allow raw pointer self types. If that's the case, we
want to know about it, and we want crate authors to know of the upcoming
changes.
For now, this can be resolved by adding the new
`arbitrary_self_types_pointers` feature to such crates. If we determine
that use of raw pointers as self types is common, then we may maintain
that as an unstable feature even if we come to stabilize the rest of the
`arbitrary_self_types` support in future. If we don't hear that this PR
is causing breakage, then perhaps we don't need it at all, even behind
an unstable feature gate.
[Tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874)
This is [step 4 of the plan outlined here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44874#issuecomment-2122179688)
|
|
|
|
closures
|
|
types as local
|
|
Don't trigger refinement lint if predicates reference errors
Fixes #129404
|
|
Use a LocalDefId in ResolvedArg.
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #127279 (use old ctx if has same expand environment during decode span)
- #127945 (Implement `debug_more_non_exhaustive`)
- #128941 ( Improve diagnostic-related lints: `untranslatable_diagnostic` & `diagnostic_outside_of_impl`)
- #129070 (Point at explicit `'static` obligations on a trait)
- #129187 (bootstrap: fix clean's remove_dir_all implementation)
- #129231 (improve submodule updates)
- #129264 (Update `library/Cargo.toml` in weekly job)
- #129284 (rustdoc: animate the `:target` highlight)
- #129302 (compiletest: use `std::fs::remove_dir_all` now that it is available)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
|
|
Given `trait Any: 'static` and a `struct` with a `Box<dyn Any + 'a>` field, point at the `'static` bound in `Any` to explain why `'a: 'static`.
```
error[E0478]: lifetime bound not satisfied
--> f202.rs:2:12
|
2 | value: Box<dyn std::any::Any + 'a>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: lifetime parameter instantiated with the lifetime `'a` as defined here
--> f202.rs:1:14
|
1 | struct Hello<'a> {
| ^^
note: but lifetime parameter must outlive the static lifetime
--> /home/gh-estebank/rust/library/core/src/any.rs:113:16
|
113 | pub trait Any: 'static {
| ^^^^^^^
```
Partially address #33652.
|
|
Use shorthand field initialization syntax more aggressively in the compiler
Caught these when cleaning up #129344 and decided to run clippy to find the rest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
