| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Migrate another part of rustc_infer to session diagnostic
Probably will migrate another file before marking this one as ready-to-merge.
`@rustbot` label +A-translation
r? rust-lang/diagnostics
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/100717
|
|
Add debug calls
`@oli-obk` requested this and other changes as a way of simplifying https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/101345. This is just going to make the diff of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/101345 smaller.
r? `@oli-obk` `@cjgillot`
|
|
Shrink `PredicateS`
r? `@ghost`
|
|
|
|
|
|
supported by them
|
|
Co-authored-by: David Wood <agile.lion3441@fuligin.ink>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
r=oli-obk
Suggest introducing an explicit lifetime if it does not exist
Fixes #101027
|
|
JhonnyBillM:replace-session-for-handler-in-into-diagnostic, r=davidtwco
Update `SessionDiagnostic::into_diagnostic` to take `Handler` instead of `ParseSess`
Suggested by the team in [this Zulip Topic](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/336883-i18n/topic/.23100717.20SessionDiagnostic.20on.20Handler).
`Handler` already has almost all the capabilities of `ParseSess` when it comes to diagnostic emission, in this migration we only needed to add the ability to access `source_map` from the emitter in order to get a `Snippet` and the `start_point`. Not sure if adding these two methods [`span_to_snippet_from_emitter` and `span_start_point_from_emitter`] is the best way to address this gap.
P.S. If this goes in the right direction, then we probably may want to move `SessionDiagnostic` to `rustc_errors` and rename it to `DiagnosticHandler` or something similar.
r? `@davidtwco`
r? `@compiler-errors`
|
|
r=cjgillot
Separate the receiver from arguments in HIR
Related to #100232
cc `@cjgillot`
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suggested by the team in this Zulip Topic https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/336883-i18n/topic/.23100717.20SessionDiagnostic.20on.20Handler
Handler already has almost all the capabilities of ParseSess when it comes to diagnostic emission, in this migration we only needed to add the ability to access source_map from the emitter in order to get a Snippet and the start_point. Not sure if this is the best way to address this gap
|
|
This shrinks the `PredicateS` type, which is instanted frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This PR will fix some typos detected by [typos].
I only picked the ones I was sure were spelling errors to fix, mostly in
the comments.
[typos]: https://github.com/crate-ci/typos
|
|
Remove path string
|
|
Attempt to normalize `FnDef` signature in `InferCtxt::cmp`
Stashes a normalization callback in `InferCtxt` so that the signature we get from `tcx.fn_sig(..).subst(..)` in `InferCtxt::cmp` can be properly normalized, since we cannot expect for it to have normalized types since it comes straight from astconv.
This is kind of a hack, but I will say that `@jyn514` found the fact that we present unnormalized types to be very confusing in real life code, and I agree with that feeling. Though altogether I am still a bit unsure about whether this PR is worth the effort, so I'm open to alternatives and/or just closing it outright.
On the other hand, this isn't a ridiculously heavy implementation anyways -- it's less than a hundred lines of changes, and half of that is just miscellaneous cleanup.
This is stacked onto #100471 which is basically unrelated, and it can be rebased off of that when that lands or if needed.
---
The code:
```rust
trait Foo { type Bar; }
impl<T> Foo for T {
type Bar = i32;
}
fn foo<T>(_: <T as Foo>::Bar) {}
fn needs_i32_ref_fn(f: fn(&'static i32)) {}
fn main() {
needs_i32_ref_fn(foo::<()>);
}
```
Before:
```
= note: expected fn pointer `fn(&'static i32)`
found fn item `fn(<() as Foo>::Bar) {foo::<()>}`
```
After:
```
= note: expected fn pointer `fn(&'static i32)`
found fn item `fn(i32) {foo::<()>}`
```
|
|
Do not leak type variables from opaque type relation
The "root cause" is that we call `InferCtxt::resolve_vars_if_possible` (3d9dd681f520d1d59f38aed0056cf9474894cc74) on the types we get back in `TypeError::Sorts` since I added a call to it in `InferCtxt::same_type_modulo_infer`. However if this `TypeError` comes from a `InferCtxt::commit_if_ok`, then it may reference type variables that do not exist anymore, which is problematic.
We avoid this by substituting the `TypeError` with the types we had before being generalized while handling opaques.
This is kinda gross, and I feel like we can get the same issue from other places where we generalize type/const inference variables. Maybe not? I don't know.
Fixes #99914
Fixes #99970
Fixes #100463
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #95376 (Add `vec::Drain{,Filter}::keep_rest`)
- #100092 (Fall back when relating two opaques by substs in MIR typeck)
- #101019 (Suggest returning closure as `impl Fn`)
- #101022 (Erase late bound regions before comparing types in `suggest_dereferences`)
- #101101 (interpret: make read-pointer-as-bytes a CTFE-only error with extra information)
- #101123 (Remove `register_attr` feature)
- #101175 (Don't --bless in pre-push hook)
- #101176 (rustdoc: remove unused CSS selectors for `.table-display`)
- #101180 (Add another MaybeUninit array test with const)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
Erase late bound regions before comparing types in `suggest_dereferences`
Fixes #101020
|
|
Fall back when relating two opaques by substs in MIR typeck
This is certainly _one_ way to fix #100075. Not really confident it's the _best_ way to do it, though.
The root cause of this issue is that during MIR type-check, we end up trying to equate an opaque against the same opaque def-id but with different substs. Because of the way that we replace RPITs during (HIR) typeck with an inference variable, we don't end up emitting a type-checking error, so the delayed MIR bug causes an ICE.
See the `src/test/ui/impl-trait/issue-100075-2.rs` test below to make that clear -- in that example, we try to equate `{impl Sized} substs=[T]` and `{impl Sized} substs=[Option<T>]`, which causes an ICE. This new logic will instead cause us to infer `{impl Sized} substs=[Option<T>]` as the hidden type for `{impl Sized} substs=[T]`, which causes a proper error to be emitted later on when we check that an opaque isn't recursive.
I'm open to closing this in favor of something else. Ideally we'd fix this in typeck, but the thing we do to ensure backwards compatibility with weird RPIT cases makes that difficult. Also open to discussing this further.
|
|
Revert let_chains stabilization
This is the revert against master, the beta revert was already done in #100538.
Bumps the stage0 compiler which already has it reverted.
|
|
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #100898 (Do not report too many expr field candidates)
- #101056 (Add the syntax of references to their documentation summary.)
- #101106 (Rustdoc-Json: Retain Stripped Modules when they are imported, not when they have items)
- #101131 (CTFE: exposing pointers and calling extern fn is just impossible)
- #101141 (Simplify `get_trait_ref` fn used for `virtual_function_elimination`)
- #101146 (Various changes to logging of borrowck-related code)
- #101156 (Remove `Sync` requirement from lint pass objects)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
Various changes to logging of borrowck-related code
Cleanups found when doing other changes
r? `@compiler-errors`
|
|
This reverts commit 326646074940222d602f3683d0559088690830f4.
This is the revert against master, the beta revert was already done in #100538.
|
|
|
|
Remove separate indexing of early-bound regions
~Based on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99728.~
This PR copies some modifications from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97839 around object lifetime defaults.
These modifications allow to stop counting generic parameters during lifetime resolution, and rely on the indexing given by `rustc_typeck::collect`.
|
|
Migrate part of rustc_infer to session diagnostic
|
|
Improve const mismatch `FulfillmentError`
Fixes #100414
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stabilize `#![feature(label_break_value)]`
See the stabilization report in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-1186213313.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Stabilization proposal
The feature was implemented in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/50045 by est31 and has been in nightly since 2018-05-16 (over 4 years now).
There are [no open issues][issue-label] other than the tracking issue. There is a strong consensus that `break` is the right keyword and we should not use `return`.
There have been several concerns raised about this feature on the tracking issue (other than the one about tests, which has been fixed, and an interaction with try blocks, which has been fixed).
1. nrc's original comment about cost-benefit analysis: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-422235234
2. joshtriplett's comments about seeing use cases: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-422281176
3. withoutboats's comments that Rust does not need more control flow constructs: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-450050630
Many different examples of code that's simpler using this feature have been provided:
- A lexer by rpjohnst which must repeat code without label-break-value: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-422502014
- A snippet by SergioBenitez which avoids using a new function and adding several new return points to a function: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-427628251. This particular case would also work if `try` blocks were stabilized (at the cost of making the code harder to optimize).
- Several examples by JohnBSmith: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-434651395
- Several examples by Centril: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-440154733
- An example by petrochenkov where this is used in the compiler itself to avoid duplicating error checking code: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-443557569
- Amanieu recently provided another example related to complex conditions, where try blocks would not have helped: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-1184213006
Additionally, petrochenkov notes that this is strictly more powerful than labelled loops due to macros which accidentally exit a loop instead of being consumed by the macro matchers: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-450246249
nrc later resolved their concern, mostly because of the aforementioned macro problems.
joshtriplett suggested that macros could be able to generate IR directly
(https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-451685983) but there are no open RFCs,
and the design space seems rather speculative.
joshtriplett later resolved his concerns, due to a symmetry between this feature and existing labelled break: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-632960804
withoutboats has regrettably left the language team.
joshtriplett later posted that the lang team would consider starting an FCP given a stabilization report: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48594#issuecomment-1111269353
[issue-label]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3AF-label_break_value+
## Report
+ Feature gate:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/d695a497bbf4b20d2580b75075faa80230d41667/src/test/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-label_break_value.rs
+ Diagnostics:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6b2d3d5f3cd1e553d87b5496632132565b6779d3/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/diagnostics.rs#L2629
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/f65bf0b2bb1a99f73095c01a118f3c37d3ee614c/compiler/rustc_resolve/src/diagnostics.rs#L749
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/f65bf0b2bb1a99f73095c01a118f3c37d3ee614c/compiler/rustc_resolve/src/diagnostics.rs#L1001
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/111df9e6eda1d752233482c1309d00d20a4bbf98/compiler/rustc_passes/src/loops.rs#L254
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/d695a497bbf4b20d2580b75075faa80230d41667/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/expr.rs#L2079
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/d695a497bbf4b20d2580b75075faa80230d41667/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/expr.rs#L1569
+ Tests:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/label/label_break_value_continue.rs
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/label/label_break_value_unlabeled_break.rs
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/label/label_break_value_illegal_uses.rs
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/lint/unused_labels.rs
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/run-pass/for-loop-while/label_break_value.rs
## Interactions with other features
Labels follow the hygiene of local variables.
label-break-value is permitted within `try` blocks:
```rust
let _: Result<(), ()> = try {
'foo: {
Err(())?;
break 'foo;
}
};
```
label-break-value is disallowed within closures, generators, and async blocks:
```rust
'a: {
|| break 'a
//~^ ERROR use of unreachable label `'a`
//~| ERROR `break` inside of a closure
}
```
label-break-value is disallowed on [_BlockExpression_]; it can only occur as a [_LoopExpression_]:
```rust
fn labeled_match() {
match false 'b: { //~ ERROR block label not supported here
_ => {}
}
}
macro_rules! m {
($b:block) => {
'lab: $b; //~ ERROR cannot use a `block` macro fragment here
unsafe $b; //~ ERROR cannot use a `block` macro fragment here
|x: u8| -> () $b; //~ ERROR cannot use a `block` macro fragment here
}
}
fn foo() {
m!({});
}
```
[_BlockExpression_]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/expressions/block-expr.html
[_LoopExpression_]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/expressions/loop-expr.html
|
|
InferCtxt tainted_by_errors_flag should be Option<ErrorGuaranteed>
Fixes #100321.
Use Cell<Option<ErrorGuaranteed>> to guarantee that we emit an error when that flag is set.
|
|
|
|
Those are basically the same but the first one seems to fit better
|
|
|
