| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
This shirnks the size of `ConstraintCategory`, hopefully
fixing a performance regression.
|
|
This PR has several interconnected pieces:
1. In some of the NLL region error code, we now pass
around an `ObligationCause`, instead of just a plain `Span`.
This gets forwarded into `fulfill_cx.register_predicate_obligation`
during error reporting.
2. The general InferCtxt error reporting code is extended to
handle `ObligationCauseCode::BindingObligation`
3. A new enum variant `ConstraintCategory::Predicate` is added.
We try to avoid using this as the 'best blame constraint' - instead,
we use it to enhance the `ObligationCause` of the `BlameConstraint`
that we do end up choosing.
As a result, several NLL error messages now contain the same
"the lifetime requirement is introduced here" message as non-NLL
errors.
Having an `ObligationCause` available will likely prove useful
for future improvements to NLL error messages.
|
|
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)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rejecting the forbidden unsafe ops is done by const checking, not by unsafety checking
|
|
the safe_packed_borrows lint that it replaces
|
|
r=nikomatsakis
Stabilize `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` lint
This makes it possible to override the level of the `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn`, as proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71668#issuecomment-729770896.
Tracking issue: #71668
r? ```@nikomatsakis``` cc ```@SimonSapin``` ```@RalfJung```
# Stabilization report
This is a stabilization report for `#![feature(unsafe_block_in_unsafe_fn)]`.
## Summary
Currently, the body of unsafe functions is an unsafe block, i.e. you can perform unsafe operations inside.
The `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` lint, stabilized here, can be used to change this behavior, so performing unsafe operations in unsafe functions requires an unsafe block.
For now, the lint is allow-by-default, which means that this PR does not change anything without overriding the lint level.
For more information, see [RFC 2585](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2585-unsafe-block-in-unsafe-fn.md)
### Example
```rust
// An `unsafe fn` for demonstration purposes.
// Calling this is an unsafe operation.
unsafe fn unsf() {}
// #[allow(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)] by default,
// the behavior of `unsafe fn` is unchanged
unsafe fn allowed() {
// Here, no `unsafe` block is needed to
// perform unsafe operations...
unsf();
// ...and any `unsafe` block is considered
// unused and is warned on by the compiler.
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
#[warn(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]
unsafe fn warned() {
// Removing this `unsafe` block will
// cause the compiler to emit a warning.
// (Also, no "unused unsafe" warning will be emitted here.)
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
#[deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]
unsafe fn denied() {
// Removing this `unsafe` block will
// cause a compilation error.
// (Also, no "unused unsafe" warning will be emitted here.)
unsafe {
unsf();
}
}
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This allows CTFE to reliably detect UB, as otherwise
optimizations may hide UB.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
