| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Various fixes for const_trait_impl
A few problems I found while making `Iterator` easier to const-implement.
1. More generous `~const Drop` check.
We check for nested fields with caller bounds.
For example, an ADT type with fields of types `A`, `B`, `C`, check if all of them are either:
- Bounded (`A: ~const Drop`, `B: Copy`)
- Known to be able to destruct at compile time (`C = i32`, `struct C(i32)`, `C = some_fn`)
2. Don't treat trait functions marked with `#[default_method_body_is_const]` as stable const fns when checking `const_for` and `const_try` feature gates.
I think anyone can review this, so no r? this time.
|
|
Create rustdoc_internals feature gate
As suggested by ``@camelid`` [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/90398#issuecomment-955093851), since `doc_keyword` and `doc_primitive` aren't meant to be stabilized, we could put them behind a same feature flag.
This is pretty much what it would look like (needs to update the tests too).
The tracking issue is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90418.
What do you think ``@rust-lang/rustdoc`` ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
warn on must_use use on async fn's
As referenced in #78149
This only works on `async` fn's for now, I can also look into if I can get `Box<dyn Future>` and `impl Future` working at this level (hir)
|
|
Co-authored-by: Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
|
|
Works as expected, and there are widespread reports of success with it,
as well as interest in it.
|
|
|
|
Type inference for inline consts
Fixes #78132
Fixes #78174
Fixes #81857
Fixes #89964
Perform type checking/inference of inline consts in the same context as the outer def, similar to what is currently done to closure.
Doing so would require `closure_base_def_id` of the inline const to return the outer def, and since `closure_base_def_id` can be called on non-local crate (and thus have no HIR available), a new `DefKind` is created for inline consts.
The type of the generated anon const can capture lifetime of outer def, so we couldn't just use the typeck result as the type of the inline const's def. Closure has a similar issue, and it uses extra type params `CK, CS, U` to capture closure kind, input/output signature and upvars. I use a similar approach for inline consts, letting it have an extra type param `R`, and then `typeof(InlineConst<[paremt generics], R>)` would just be `R`. In borrowck region requirements are also propagated to the outer MIR body just like it's currently done for closure.
With this PR, inline consts in expression position are quitely usable now; however the usage in pattern position is still incomplete -- since those does not remain in the MIR borrowck couldn't verify the lifetime there. I have left an ignored test as a FIXME.
Some disucssions can be found on [this Zulip thread](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/260443-project-const-generics/topic/inline.20consts.20typeck).
cc `````@spastorino````` `````@lcnr`````
r? `````@nikomatsakis`````
`````@rustbot````` label A-inference F-inline_const T-compiler
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In most cases it is handled in the same way as closures.
|
|
Unify titles in rustdoc book doc attributes chapter
As discussed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/90339.
I wasn't able to find out where the link to the titles was used so let's see if the CI fails. :)
r? ``@camelid``
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
make #[target_feature] work with `asm` register classes
Fixes #89289
|
|
clippy::complexity fixes
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #89298 (Issue 89193 - Fix ICE when using `usize` and `isize` with SIMD gathers )
- #89461 (Add `deref_into_dyn_supertrait` lint.)
- #89477 (Move items related to computing diffs to a separate file)
- #89559 (RustWrapper: adapt for LLVM API change)
- #89585 (Emit item no type error even if type inference fails)
- #89596 (Make cfg imply doc(cfg))
- #89615 (Add InferCtxt::with_opaque_type_inference to get_body_with_borrowck_facts)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
Make cfg imply doc(cfg)
This is a reopening of #79341, rebased and modified a bit (we made a lot of refactoring in rustdoc's types so they needed to be reflected in this PR as well):
* `hidden_cfg` is now in the `Cache` instead of `DocContext` because `cfg` information isn't stored anymore on `clean::Attributes` type but instead computed on-demand, so we need this information in later parts of rustdoc.
* I removed the `bool_to_options` feature (which makes the code a bit simpler to read for `SingleExt` trait implementation.
* I updated the version for the feature.
There is only one thing I couldn't figure out: [this comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79341#discussion_r561855624)
> I think I'll likely scrap the whole `SingleExt` extension trait as the diagnostics for 0 and >1 items should be different.
How/why should they differ?
EDIT: this part has been solved, the current code was fine, just needed a little simplification.
cc `@Nemo157`
r? `@jyn514`
Original PR description:
This is only active when the `doc_cfg` feature is active.
The implicit cfg can be overridden via `#[doc(cfg(...))]`, so e.g. to hide a `#[cfg]` you can use something like:
```rust
#[cfg(unix)]
#[doc(cfg(all()))]
pub struct Unix;
```
By adding `#![doc(cfg_hide(foobar))]` to the crate attributes the cfg `#[cfg(foobar)]` (and _only_ that _exact_ cfg) will not be implicitly treated as a `doc(cfg)` to render a message in the documentation.
|
|
Introduce `tcx.get_diagnostic_name`
Introduces a "reverse lookup" for diagnostic items. This is mainly intended for `@rust-lang/clippy` which often does a long series of `is_diagnostic_item` calls for the same `DefId`.
r? `@oli-obk`
|
|
perf: only check for `rustc_trivial_field_reads` attribute on traits, not items, impls, etc.
The checks that are removed in this PR (originally added in #85200) caused a small perf regression: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/88824#issuecomment-932664761
Since the attribute is currently only applied to traits, I don't think it's worth keeping the additional checks for now.
If/when we decide to apply the attribute somewhere else, we can (partially) revert this and reevaluate the perf impact.
r? `@nikomatsakis` cc `@FabianWolff`
|
|
|
|
Add check for duplicated doc aliases
r? ``@estebank``
|
|
Fix suggestion for nested struct patterns
Fixes #88403, and also a similar problem where the unused binding is in a function parameter pattern.
|
|
|
|
Move ICH to rustc_query_system
Based on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89183
The StableHashingContext does not need to be in rustc_middle.
This PR moves it to rustc_query_system. This will avoid a dependency between rustc_ast_lowering and rustc_middle in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89124.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
this matches behavior of existing code
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/b27661eb33c74cb514dba059b47d86b6582ac1c2/compiler/rustc_passes/src/liveness.rs#L326-L333
|
|
The checks removed here caused a small perf regression:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/88824#issuecomment-932664761
Since the attribute is currently only applied to traits, I don't think
it's worth keeping the additional checks for now.
If/when we decide to apply the attribute somewhere else, we can
(partially) revert this and evaluate if the perf impact is acceptable.
|
|
|
|
Implement `#[must_not_suspend]`
implements #83310
Some notes on the impl:
1. The code that searches for the attribute on the ADT is basically copied from the `must_use` lint. It's not shared, as the logic did diverge
2. The RFC does specify that the attribute can be placed on fn's (and fn-like objects), like `must_use`. I think this is a direct copy from the `must_use` reference definition. This implementation does NOT support this, as I felt that ADT's (+ `impl Trait` + `dyn Trait`) cover the usecase's people actually want on the RFC, and adding an imp for the fn call case would be significantly harder. The `must_use` impl can do a single check at fn call stmt time, but `must_not_suspend` would need to answer the question: "for some value X with type T, find any fn call that COULD have produced this value". That would require significant changes to `generator_interior.rs`, and I would need mentorship on that. `@eholk` and I are discussing it.
3. `@estebank` do you know a way I can make the user-provided `reason` note pop out? right now it seems quite hidden
Also, I am not sure if we should run perf on this
r? `@nikomatsakis`
|
|
|
|
Gather module items after lowering.
This avoids having a non-local analysis inside lowering.
By implementing `hir_module_items` using a visitor, we make sure that iterations and visitors are consistent.
|
|
If #![feature] is used outside the nightly channel for only lib
features, the check will be delayed to the stability pass after
parsing. This is done so that appropriate help messages can be shown if
the #![feature] has been used needlessly
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
example: let x: String = String::new().into();
|
|
|
