| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Update links to Rust Reference in diagnostic
Instead of linking to the [old Rust Reference site](https://static.rust-lang.org/doc/master/reference.html#literals), which is severely outdated (Rust 1.17), link to the [current website](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference/expressions/literal-expr.html) in diagnostic about incorrect literals.
|
|
|
|
Instead of linking to the old Rust Reference site on static.rust-lang.org,
link to the current website doc.rust-lang.org/stable/reference instead in
diagnostic about incorrect literals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The tokenizer gives us whole float literal tokens, we have to split them up
in order to be able to create field access from them.
|
|
Purely a refactor in preparation of using it in offset_of!() parsing
|
|
|
|
Use `Cow` in `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage`.
Each of `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage::{Str,Eager}` has a comment:
```
// FIXME(davidtwco): can a `Cow<'static, str>` be used here?
```
This commit answers that question in the affirmative. It's not the most compelling change ever, but it might be worth merging.
This requires changing the `impl<'a> From<&'a str>` impls to `impl From<&'static str>`, which involves a bunch of knock-on changes that require/result in call sites being a little more precise about exactly what kind of string they use to create errors, and not just `&str`. This will result in fewer unnecessary allocations, though this will not have any notable perf effects given that these are error paths.
Note that I was lazy within Clippy, using `to_string` in a few places to preserve the existing string imprecision. I could have used `impl Into<{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage>` in various places as is done in the compiler, but that would have required changes to *many* call sites (mostly changing `&format("...")` to `format!("...")`) which didn't seem worthwhile.
r? `@WaffleLapkin`
|
|
Each of `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage::{Str,Eager}` has a comment:
```
// FIXME(davidtwco): can a `Cow<'static, str>` be used here?
```
This commit answers that question in the affirmative. It's not the most
compelling change ever, but it might be worth merging.
This requires changing the `impl<'a> From<&'a str>` impls to `impl
From<&'static str>`, which involves a bunch of knock-on changes that
require/result in call sites being a little more precise about exactly
what kind of string they use to create errors, and not just `&str`. This
will result in fewer unnecessary allocations, though this will not have
any notable perf effects given that these are error paths.
Note that I was lazy within Clippy, using `to_string` in a few places to
preserve the existing string imprecision. I could have used `impl
Into<{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage>` in various places as is done in the
compiler, but that would have required changes to *many* call sites
(mostly changing `&format("...")` to `format!("...")`) which didn't seem
worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
fix(parse): return unpected when current token is EOF
close https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/111148
#111148 panic occurred because [FatalError.raise()](https://github.com/bvanjoi/rust/blob/master/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/mod.rs#LL540C3-L540C3) was encountered which caused by `Eof` and `Pound`(the last token) had same span, when parsing `#` in `fn a<<i<Y<w<>#`.
<img width="825" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/30187863/236612589-9e2c6a0b-18cd-408c-b636-c12a51cbcf1c.png">
There are a few ways to solve this problem:
- Change the action assign for [self.last_unexpected_token_span](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/diagnostics.rs#L592), for example, if current token is `Eof`, then return Error directly.
- Avoid triggering the `FatalError` when the current token is `Eof`.
I have chosen the second option because executing `expected_one_of_not_found` when the token is `Eof` but not in `ediable` seems reasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Give a more useful location for where a span_bug was delayed
Before:
```
= note: delayed at 0: <rustc_errors::HandlerInner>::emit_diagnostic
at ./compiler/rustc_errors/src/lib.rs:1335:29
1: <rustc_errors::Handler>::emit_diagnostic
at ./compiler/rustc_errors/src/lib.rs:1124:9
...
```
After:
```
= note: delayed at compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/diagnostics.rs:2158:28
0: <rustc_errors::HandlerInner>::emit_diagnostic
at ./compiler/rustc_errors/src/lib.rs:1335:29
1: <rustc_errors::Handler>::emit_diagnostic
at ./compiler/rustc_errors/src/lib.rs:1124:9
...
```
This both makes the relevant frame easier to find without having to dig through diagnostic internals, and avoids the weird-looking formatting for the first frame.
Found while working on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/111529.
|
|
Do not recover when parsing stmt in cfg-eval.
`parse_stmt` does recovery on its own. When parsing the statement fails, we always get `Ok(None)` instead of an `Err` variant with the diagnostic that we can emit.
To avoid this behaviour, we need to opt-out of recovery for cfg_eval.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/105228
|
|
Avoid `&format("...")` calls in error message code.
Some error message cleanups. Best reviewed one commit at a time.
r? `@davidtwco`
|
|
Before:
```
= note: delayed at 0: <rustc_errors::HandlerInner>::emit_diagnostic
at ./compiler/rustc_errors/src/lib.rs:1335:29
1: <rustc_errors::Handler>::emit_diagnostic
at ./compiler/rustc_errors/src/lib.rs:1124:9
...
```
After:
```
= note: delayed at compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/diagnostics.rs:2158:28
0: <rustc_errors::HandlerInner>::emit_diagnostic
at ./compiler/rustc_errors/src/lib.rs:1335:29
1: <rustc_errors::Handler>::emit_diagnostic
at ./compiler/rustc_errors/src/lib.rs:1124:9
```
This both makes the relevant frame easier to find without having to dig
through diagnostic internals, and avoids the weird-looking formatting
for the first frame.
|
|
Error message all end up passing into a function as an `impl
Into<{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage>`. If an error message is creatd as
`&format("...")` that means we allocate a string (in the `format!`
call), then take a reference, and then clone (allocating again) the
reference to produce the `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage`, which is silly.
This commit removes the leading `&` from a lot of these cases. This
means the original `String` is moved into the
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage`, avoiding the double allocations. This
requires changing some function argument types from `&str` to `String`
(when all arguments are `String`) or `impl
Into<{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage>` (when some arguments are `String` and
some are `&str`).
|
|
|
|
Fix ice caused by shorthand fields in NoFieldsForFnCall
Fixes #111416
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suggest let for possible binding with ty
Origin from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/109128#discussion_r1179866137
r? `@Nilstrieb`
|
|
Implement builtin # syntax and use it for offset_of!(...)
Add `builtin #` syntax to the parser, as well as a generic infrastructure to support both item and expression position builtin syntaxes. The PR also uses this infrastructure for the implementation of the `offset_of!` macro, added by #106934.
cc `@petrochenkov` `@DrMeepster`
cc #110680 `builtin #` tracking issue
cc #106655 `offset_of!` tracking issue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
add hint for =< as <=
Adds a compiler hint for when `=<` is typed instead of `<=`
Example hint:
```rust
fn foo() {
if 1 =< 3 {
println!("Hello, World!");
}
}
```
```
error: expected type, found `3`
--> main.rs:2:13
|
2 | if 1 =< 3 {
| -- ^ expected type
| |
| help: did you mean: `<=`
```
This PR only emits the suggestion if there is no space between the `=` and `<`. This hopefully narrows the scope of when this error is emitted, however this still allows this error to be emitted in cases such as this:
```
error: expected expression, found `;`
--> main.rs:2:18
|
2 | if 1 =< [i32;; 3]>::hello() {
| -- ^ expected expression
| |
| help: did you mean: `<=`
```
Which could be a good reason not to merge since I haven't been able to think of any other ways of narrowing the scope of this diagnostic.
closes #111128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implement RFC 3348, `c"foo"` literals
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3348
Tracking issue: #105723
|
|
Implement negative bounds for internal testing purposes
Implements partial support the `!` negative polarity on trait bounds. This is incomplete, but should allow us to at least be able to play with the feature.
Not even gonna consider them as a public-facing feature, but I'm implementing them because would've been nice to have in UI tests, for example in #110671.
|
|
Currently a `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage` can be created from any type that
impls `Into<String>`. That includes `&str`, `String`, and `Cow<'static,
str>`, which are reasonable. It also includes `&String`, which is pretty
weird, and results in many places making unnecessary allocations for
patterns like this:
```
self.fatal(&format!(...))
```
This creates a string with `format!`, takes a reference, passes the
reference to `fatal`, which does an `into()`, which clones the
reference, doing a second allocation. Two allocations for a single
string, bleh.
This commit changes the `From` impls so that you can only create a
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage` from `&str`, `String`, or `Cow<'static,
str>`. This requires changing all the places that currently create one
from a `&String`. Most of these are of the `&format!(...)` form
described above; each one removes an unnecessary static `&`, plus an
allocation when executed. There are also a few places where the existing
use of `&String` was more reasonable; these now just use `clone()` at
the call site.
As well as making the code nicer and more efficient, this is a step
towards possibly using `Cow<'static, str>` in
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage::{Str,Eager}`. That would require changing
the `From<&'a str>` impls to `From<&'static str>`, which is doable, but
I'm not yet sure if it's worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
