| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
r=compiler-errors
Rename HIR `TypeBinding` to `AssocItemConstraint` and related cleanup
Rename `hir::TypeBinding` and `ast::AssocConstraint` to `AssocItemConstraint` and update all items and locals using the old terminology.
Motivation: The terminology *type binding* is extremely outdated. "Type bindings" not only include constraints on associated *types* but also on associated *constants* (feature `associated_const_equality`) and on RPITITs of associated *functions* (feature `return_type_notation`). Hence the word *item* in the new name. Furthermore, the word *binding* commonly refers to a mapping from a binder/identifier to a "value" for some definition of "value". Its use in "type binding" made sense when equality constraints (e.g., `AssocTy = Ty`) were the only kind of associated item constraint. Nowadays however, we also have *associated type bounds* (e.g., `AssocTy: Bound`) for which the term *binding* doesn't make sense.
---
Old terminology (HIR, rustdoc):
```
`TypeBinding`: (associated) type binding
├── `Constraint`: associated type bound
└── `Equality`: (associated) equality constraint (?)
├── `Ty`: (associated) type binding
└── `Const`: associated const equality (constraint)
```
Old terminology (AST, abbrev.):
```
`AssocConstraint`
├── `Bound`
└── `Equality`
├── `Ty`
└── `Const`
```
New terminology (AST, HIR, rustdoc):
```
`AssocItemConstraint`: associated item constraint
├── `Bound`: associated type bound
└── `Equality`: associated item equality constraint OR associated item binding (for short)
├── `Ty`: associated type equality constraint OR associated type binding (for short)
└── `Const`: associated const equality constraint OR associated const binding (for short)
```
r? compiler-errors
|
|
|
|
Almost all callers want this anyway, and now we can use it to also return fed bodies
|
|
call
|
|
|
|
Remove more `#[macro_use] extern crate tracing`
Because explicit importing of macros via use items is nicer (more standard and readable) than implicit importing via `#[macro_use]`. Continuing the work from #124511 and #124914.
r? `@jackh726`
|
|
Detect unused structs which implement private traits
Fixes #122361
|
|
rustc: Use `tcx.used_crates(())` more
And explain when it should be used.
Addresses comments from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121167.
|
|
|
|
Fix OutsideLoop's error suggestion: adding label `'block` for `if` block.
For OutsideLoop we should not suggest add `'block` label in `if` block, or we wiil get another err: block label not supported here.
fixes #123261
|
|
|
|
And explain when it should be used.
|
|
wiil get another err: block label not supported here.
fixes #123261
|
|
weiznich:move/do_not_recommend_to_diganostic_namespace, r=compiler-errors
Move `#[do_not_recommend]` to the `#[diagnostic]` namespace
This commit moves the `#[do_not_recommend]` attribute to the `#[diagnostic]` namespace. It still requires
`#![feature(do_not_recommend)]` to work.
r? `@compiler-errors`
|
|
This commit moves the `#[do_not_recommend]` attribute to the
`#[diagnostic]` namespace. It still requires
`#![feature(do_not_recommend)]` to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust
reuse prefix::{a, b, c}
```
|
|
|
|
reachable computation: extend explanation of what this does, and why
Follow-up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/122769. I had the time to think about this some more, in particular in the context of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/119214, so I felt it was worth extending these comments some more.
I also gave up on the context of "externally reachable" as it is not called that way anywhere else in the compiler.
Cc `@tmiasko` `@saethlin`
|
|
|
|
Previously, `break` inside `gen` blocks and functions
were incorrectly identified to be enclosed by a closure.
This PR fixes it by displaying an appropriate error message
for async blocks, async closures, async functions, gen blocks,
gen closures, gen functions, async gen blocks, async gen closures
and async gen functions.
Note: gen closure and async gen closure are not supported by the
compiler yet but I have added an error message here assuming that
they might be implemented in the future.
Also, fixes grammar in a few places by replacing
`inside of a $coroutine` with `inside a $coroutine`.
|
|
This moves some code around and adds some documentation comments to make
it easier to understand what's going on with the entrypoint logic, which
is a bit complicated.
The only change in behavior is consolidating the error messages for
unix_sigpipe to make the code slightly simpler.
|
|
Change `SIGPIPE` ui from `#[unix_sigpipe = "..."]` to `-Zon-broken-pipe=...`
In the stabilization [attempt](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120832) of `#[unix_sigpipe = "sig_dfl"]`, a concern was [raised ](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120832#issuecomment-2007394609) related to using a language attribute for the feature: Long term, we want `fn lang_start()` to be definable by any crate, not just libstd. Having a special language attribute in that case becomes awkward.
So as a first step towards the next stabilization attempt, this PR changes the `#[unix_sigpipe = "..."]` attribute to a compiler flag `-Zon-broken-pipe=...` to remove that concern, since now the language is not "contaminated" by this feature.
Another point was [also raised](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120832#issuecomment-1987023484), namely that the ui should not leak **how** it does things, but rather what the **end effect** is. The new flag uses the proposed naming. This is of course something that can be iterated on further before stabilization.
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97889
|
|
In the stabilization attempt of `#[unix_sigpipe = "sig_dfl"]`, a concern
was raised related to using a language attribute for the feature: Long
term, we want `fn lang_start()` to be definable by any crate, not just
libstd. Having a special language attribute in that case becomes
awkward.
So as a first step towards towards the next stabilization attempt, this
PR changes the `#[unix_sigpipe = "..."]` attribute to a compiler flag
`-Zon-broken-pipe=...` to remove that concern, since now the language
is not "contaminated" by this feature.
Another point was also raised, namely that the ui should not leak
**how** it does things, but rather what the **end effect** is. The new
flag uses the proposed naming. This is of course something that can be
iterated on further before stabilization.
|
|
|
|
And avoid duplicating logic for visiting `Item`s with different kinds (regular, associated, foreign).
|
|
Allow nesting subdiagnostics in #[derive(Subdiagnostic)]
|
|
weak lang items are not allowed to be #[track_caller]
For instance the panic handler will be called via this import
```rust
extern "Rust" {
#[lang = "panic_impl"]
fn panic_impl(pi: &PanicInfo<'_>) -> !;
}
```
A `#[track_caller]` would add an extra argument and thus make this the wrong signature.
The 2nd commit is a consistency rename; based on the docs [here](https://doc.rust-lang.org/unstable-book/language-features/lang-items.html) and [here](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/lang-items.html) I figured "lang item" is more widely used. (In the compiler output, "lang item" and "language item" seem to be pretty even.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because they're a bit redundant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fix #123428
|
|
Simplify trim-paths feature by merging all debuginfo options together
This PR simplifies the trim-paths feature by merging all debuginfo options together, as described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/111540#issuecomment-1994010274.
And also do some correctness fixes found during the review.
cc `@weihanglo`
r? `@michaelwoerister`
|
|
so it can be remapped (or not) by callers
|
|
Function ABI is irrelevant for reachability
|
|
extend comments for reachability set computation
I hope this is right. :) Please review carefully.
r? ``@tmiasko``
Cc ``@oli-obk`` ``@saethlin``
|
|
also extend the const fn reachability test
|
|
|
|
Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt`
Follow-up of #122776.
As discussed on [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Improve.20naming.20of.20.60ExprKind.3A.3ALet.60.3F).
I made this change into a separate PR because I'm less sure about this change as is. For example, we have `visit_local` and `LocalSource` items. Is it fine to keep these two as is (I supposed it is but I prefer to ask) or not? Having `Node::Local(LetStmt)` makes things more explicit but is it going too far?
r? ```@oli-obk```
|
|
Replace visibility test with reachability test in dead code detection
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/119545
Also included is a fix for an error now flagged by the lint
|
