| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Instead of `ast::Ident`, bindings, paths and labels in HIR now keep a new structure called `hir::Ident` containing mtwt-renamed `name` and the original not-renamed `unhygienic_name`. `name` is supposed to be used by default, `unhygienic_name` is rarely used.
This is not ideal, but better than the status quo for two reasons:
- MTWT tables can be cleared immediately after lowering to HIR
- This is less bug-prone, because it is impossible now to forget applying `mtwt::resolve` to a name. It is still possible to use `name` instead of `unhygienic_name` by mistake, but `unhygienic_name`s are used only in few very special circumstances, so it shouldn't be a problem.
Besides name resolution `unhygienic_name` is used in some lints and debuginfo. `unhygienic_name` can be very well approximated by "reverse renaming" `token::intern(name.as_str())` or even plain string `name.as_str()`, except that it would break gensyms like `iter` in desugared `for` loops. This approximation is likely good enough for lints and debuginfo, but not for name resolution, unfortunately (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27639), so `unhygienic_name` has to be kept.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29782
r? @nrc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
nodes in statement position.
Extended #[cfg] folder to allow removal of statements, and
of expressions in optional positions like expression lists and trailing
block expressions.
Extended lint checker to recognize lint levels on expressions and
locals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
that we no longer use FnvHashMap
|
|
|
|
|
|
rather being stored inline. Refactor (and rename) the visitor so that
(by default) it only visits the interior content of an item not nested
items.
This is a [breaking-change] for anyone who uses the HIR visitor. Besides
changing `visit::` to `intravisit::`, you need to refactor your visitor
in one of two ways, depending on what it requires:
1. If you just want to visit all items (most common), you should call
`krate.visit_all_items(&mut visitor)`.
2. If you need to visit nested items in the middle of the parent items,
you should override `visit_nested_item` with something like:
`self.visit_item(self.tcx.map.expect_item(item.id))`, presuming you
have access to a tcx (or at least a HIR map).
|
|
instead of `Cell` (but stop short of actualling switching to `&mut`)
|
|
|
|
[breaking change]
I'm not sure if those renames are ok. [TokenType::Tt* to TokenType::*](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/29582) was obvious, but for all those Item-enums it's less obvious to me what the right way forward is due to the underscore.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[breaking change]
|
|
removing a bunch of asserts
|
|
|
|
The public set is expanded with trait items, impls and their items, foreign items, exported macros, variant fields, i.e. all the missing parts. Now it's a subset of the exported set.
This is needed for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/29083 because stability annotation pass uses the public set and all things listed above need to be annotated.
Rustdoc can now be migrated to the public set as well, I guess.
Exported set is now slightly more correct with regard to exported items in blocks - 1) blocks in foreign items are considered and 2) publicity is not inherited from the block's parent - if a function is public it doesn't mean structures defined in its body are public.
r? @alexcrichton or maybe someone else
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
And use VariantData instead of P<VariantData> in Item_ and Variant_
|
|
|
|
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/28750
`Arm` and `Generics` don't have spans at all, so it's not a visitor's problem, `visit_struct_def` was fixed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/28816
|
|
Stricter checking of stability attributes + enforcement of their invariants at compile time
(+ removed dead file librustc_front/attr.rs)
I intended to enforce use of `reason` for unstable items as well (it normally presents for new items), but it turned out too intrusive, many older unstable items don't have `reason`s.
r? @aturon
I'm studying how stability works and do some refactoring along the way, so it's probably not the last PR.
|
|
|
|
This is a [breaking change].
@brson could you do a Crater run with this PR please?
Lets not land till Crater says its OK.
This was discussed at https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/does-anyone-use-the-push-pop-unsafe-macros/2702
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stricter checking + enforcement of invariants at compile time
|
|
This is a [breaking change].
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
