| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
code suggestions for non-shorthand field pattern, no-mangle lints
continuing in the spirit of #44942
r? @estebank
|
|
|
|
|
|
support generics in each variant of TraitItem and ImplItem
|
|
We also edit the lint description to clarify that this is different from
the struct field init shorthand.
|
|
While an inner attribute here is in fact erroneous, that error ("inner
attribute is not permitted in this context") successfully gets set earlier;
this further admonition is nonsensical.
Resolves #45296.
|
|
|
|
Better error message for comma after base struct
#41834
This adds a better error for commas after the base struct:
```
let foo = Foo {
one: 111,
..Foo::default(), // This comma is a syntax error
};
```
The current error is a generic `expected one of ...` which isn't beginner-friendly. My error looks like this:
```
error: cannot use a comma after the base struct
--> tmp/example.rs:26:9
|
26 | ..Foo::default(),
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^- help: remove this comma
|
= note: the base struct expansion must always be the last field
```
I even added a note for people who don't know why this isn't allowed.
|
|
Better compile error output when using arguments instead of types
Following @estebank sugestion on issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/18945#issuecomment-331251436
|
|
` (U+0060) should be the "grave" accent, not "Greek" accent.
|
|
output message is shown in another 'help:' block
line with +100 columns formatted
test adjusted
|
|
`let x = { ..default(), } // This comma is an error`
|
|
Improve diagnostics for `x as usize << y`
|
|
Add a semicolon to span for ast::Local
|
|
See the [RFC] and [tracking issue].
[tracking issue]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/42640
[RFC]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/491e0af/text/2005-match-ergonomics.md
|
|
|
|
address some FIXME whose associated issues were marked as closed
part of #44366
|
|
add the issue number to doc_masked's feature gate
Whoops, missed this in the original `#[doc(masked)]` PR.
|
|
fix ItemKind::DefaultImpl doc comment
Upgrade comment to doc comment.
...Is this actually used? If so, why does the `Impl` variant right below have a `Defaultness`?
|
|
Don't use remapped path when loading modules and include files
Fixes bug reported in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/41555#issuecomment-327866056.
cc @michaelwoerister
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Upgrade comment to doc comment.
|
|
Also, fix the deprecation message for the late no-debug feature.
|
|
|
|
remove FIXME(#13101) since `assert_receiver_is_total_eq` stays.
remove FIXME(#19649) now that stability markers render.
remove FIXME(#13642) now the benchmarks were moved.
remove FIXME(#6220) now that floating points can be formatted.
remove FIXME(#18248) and write tests for `Rc<str>` and `Rc<[u8]>`
remove reference to irelevent issues in FIXME(#1697, #2178...)
update FIXME(#5516) to point to getopts issue 7
update FIXME(#7771) to point to RFC 628
update FIXME(#19839) to point to issue 26925
|
|
|
|
First step toward implementing impl Trait in argument position
First step implementing #44721.
Add a flag to hir and ty TypeParameterDef and raise an error when using
explicit type parameters when calling a function using impl Trait in
argument position.
I don't know if there is a procedure to add an error code so I just took an available code. Is that ok ?
r? @nikomatsakis
|
|
Apply attr proc macros before cfg processing
Fixes #39336.
r? @jseyfried
|
|
Now items are not fully configured until right before expanding derives.
|
|
Initial support for `..=` syntax
#28237
This PR adds `..=` as a synonym for `...` in patterns and expressions.
Since `...` in expressions was never stable, we now issue a warning.
cc @durka
r? @aturon
|
|
Add a flag to hir and ty TypeParameterDef and raise an error when using
explicit type parameters when calling a function using impl Trait in
argument position.
|
|
|
|
add comparison operators to must-use lint (under `fn_must_use` feature)
Although RFC 1940 is about annotating functions with `#[must_use]`, a
key part of the motivation was linting unused equality operators.
(See
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1812#issuecomment-265695898—it
seems to have not been clear to discussants at the time that marking the
comparison methods as `must_use` would not give us the lints on
comparison operators, at least in (what the present author understood
as) the most straightforward implementation, as landed in #43728
(3645b062).)
To rectify the situation, we here lint unused comparison operators as
part of the unused-must-use lint (feature gated by the `fn_must_use`
feature flag, which now arguably becomes a slight (tolerable in the
opinion of the present author) misnomer).
This is in the matter of #43302.
cc @crumblingstatue
|
|
Rollup of 14 pull requests
- Successful merges: #44554, #44648, #44658, #44712, #44717, #44726, #44745, #44746, #44749, #44759, #44770, #44773, #44776, #44778
- Failed merges:
|
|
Include unary operator to span for ExprKind::Unary
|
|
only set non-ADT derive error once per attribute, not per trait
I found the expansion code very hard to follow, leaving me unsure as to whether this might somehow be done better, but this patch does give us the behavior requested in #43927 (up to exact choice of span; here, it's the entire attribute, not just the `derive` token).
(Note to GitHub robots: _resolves #43927_.)
r? @jseyfried
|
|
Although RFC 1940 is about annotating functions with `#[must_use]`, a
key part of the motivation was linting unused equality operators.
(See
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1812#issuecomment-265695898—it
seems to have not been clear to discussants at the time that marking the
comparison methods as `must_use` would not give us the lints on
comparison operators, at least in (what the present author understood
as) the most straightforward implementation, as landed in #43728
(3645b062).)
To rectify the situation, we here lint unused comparison operators as
part of the unused-must-use lint (feature gated by the `fn_must_use`
feature flag, which now arguably becomes a slight (tolerable in the
opinion of the present author) misnomer).
This is in the matter of #43302.
|
|
|
|
... or ..=
|
|
Add ..= to the parser
Add ..= to libproc_macro
Add ..= to ICH
Highlight ..= in rustdoc
Update impl Debug for RangeInclusive to ..=
Replace `...` to `..=` in range docs
Make the dotdoteq warning point to the ...
Add warning for ... in expressions
Updated more tests to the ..= syntax
Updated even more tests to the ..= syntax
Updated the inclusive_range entry in unstable book
|
|
|
|
A slight eccentricity of this change is that now non-ADT-derive errors prevent
derive-macro-not-found errors from surfacing (see changes to the
gating-of-derive compile-fail tests).
Resolves #43927.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rework the README.md for rustc and add other readmes
OK, so, long ago I committed to the idea of trying to write some high-level documentation for rustc. This has proved to be much harder for me to get done than I thought it would! This PR is far from as complete as I had hoped, but I wanted to open it so that people can give me feedback on the conventions that it establishes. If this seems like a good way forward, we can land it and I will open an issue with a good check-list of things to write (and try to take down some of them myself).
Here are the conventions I established on which I would like feedback.
**Use README.md files**. First off, I'm aiming to keep most of the high-level docs in `README.md` files, rather than entries on forge. My thought is that such files are (a) more discoverable than forge and (b) closer to the code, and hence can be edited in a single PR. However, since they are not *in the code*, they will naturally get out of date, so the intention is to focus on the highest-level details, which are least likely to bitrot. I've included a few examples of common functions and so forth, but never tried to (e.g.) exhaustively list the names of functions and so forth.
- I would like to use the tidy scripts to try and check that these do not go out of date. Future work.
**librustc/README.md as the main entrypoint.** This seems like the most natural place people will look first. It lays out how the crates are structured and **is intended** to give pointers to the main data structures of the compiler (I didn't update that yet; the existing material is terribly dated).
**A glossary listing abbreviations and things.** It's much harder to read code if you don't know what some obscure set of letters like `infcx` stands for.
**Major modules each have their own README.md that documents the high-level idea.** For example, I wrote some stuff about `hir` and `ty`. Both of them have many missing topics, but I think that is roughly the level of depth that would be good. The idea is to give people a "feeling" for what the code does.
What is missing primarily here is lots of content. =) Here are some things I'd like to see:
- A description of what a QUERY is and how to define one
- Some comments for `librustc/ty/maps.rs`
- An overview of how compilation proceeds now (i.e., the hybrid demand-driven and forward model) and how we would like to see it going in the future (all demand-driven)
- Some coverage of how incremental will work under red-green
- An updated list of the major IRs in use of the compiler (AST, HIR, TypeckTables, MIR) and major bits of interesting code (typeck, borrowck, etc)
- More advice on how to use `x.py`, or at least pointers to that
- Good choice for `config.toml`
- How to use `RUST_LOG` and other debugging flags (e.g., `-Zverbose`, `-Ztreat-err-as-bug`)
- Helpful conventions for `debug!` statement formatting
cc @rust-lang/compiler @mgattozzi
|
|
This takes way longer than I thought it would. =)
|
