| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
available
|
|
Co-authored-by: lcnr <rust@lcnr.de>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Result of running:
rg -l "feature.let_else" src/test/ | xargs sed -s -i "s#^...feature.let_else..\$##"
Plus manual tidy fixes.
|
|
The let else suggestion added by 0d92752b8aac53e033541d04fc7d9677d8bca227
does not need a feature gate any more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Format core and std macro rules, removing needless surrounding blocks
Many of the asserting and printing macros in `core` and `std` are written with prehistoric-looking formatting, like this:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/335ffbfa547df94ac236f5c56130cecf99c8d82b/library/std/src/macros.rs#L96-L101
In modern Rust style this would conventionally be written as follows instead, always using braces and a trailing semicolon on the macro arms:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/af53809c874e0afb7be966df4d3cfcaa05277c53/library/std/src/macros.rs#L98-L105
Getting rid of the unneeded braces inside the expansion reduces extraneous indentation in macro-expanded code. For example:
```rust
println!("repro {}", true);
```
```rust
// before:
{
::std::io::_print(
::core::fmt::Arguments::new_v1(
&["repro ", "\n"],
&[::core::fmt::ArgumentV1::new_display(&true)],
),
);
};
```
```rust
// after:
::std::io::_print(
::core::fmt::Arguments::new_v1(
&["repro ", "\n"],
&[::core::fmt::ArgumentV1::new_display(&true)],
),
);
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
`span_label`
This makes the order of the output always consistent:
1. Place of the `match` missing arms
2. The `enum` definition span
3. The structured suggestion to add a fallthrough arm
|
|
Given
```rust
match Some(42) {
Some(0) => {}
Some(1) => {}
}
```
suggest
```rust
match Some(42) {
Some(0) => {}
Some(1) => {}
None | Some(_) => todo!(),
}
```
|
|
Given
```rust
match Some(42) {
Some(0) => {}
}
```
suggest
```rust
match Some(42) {
Some(0) => {}
None | Some(_) => todo!(),
}
```
|
|
Given
```rust
match Some(42) {}
```
suggest
```rust
match Some(42) { None | Some(_) => todo!(), }
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add test cases for unstable variants
Add test cases for doc hidden variants
Move is_doc_hidden to method on TyCtxt
Add unstable variants test to reachable-patterns ui test
Rename reachable-patterns -> omitted-patterns
|
|
Normalize after substituting via `field.ty()`
Back in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/72476 I hadn't understood where the problem was coming from, and only worked around the issue. What happens is that calling `field.ty()` on a field of a generic struct substitutes the appropriate generics but doesn't normalize the resulting type.
As a consumer of types I'm surprised that one would substitute without normalizing, feels like a footgun, so I added a comment.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/89393.
|
|
|
|
Add an intermediate representation to exhaustiveness checking
The exhaustiveness checking algorithm keeps deconstructing patterns into a `Constructor` and some `Fields`, but does so a bit all over the place. This PR introduces a new representation for patterns that already has that information, so we only compute it once at the start.
I find this makes code easier to follow. In particular `DeconstructedPat::specialize` is a lot simpler than what happened before, and more closely matches the description of the algorithm. I'm also hoping this could help for the project of librarifying exhaustiveness for rust_analyzer since it decouples the algorithm from `rustc_middle::Pat`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Now `Fields` is just a `Vec` of patterns, with some extra info on the
side to reconstruct patterns when needed. This emphasizes that this
extra info is not central to the algorithm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format
* When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline
* Color highlight modified span
|
|
|
|
This is step 2 towards fixing #77548.
In the codegen and codegen-units test suites, the `//` comment markers
were kept in order not to affect any source locations. This is because
these tests cannot be automatically `--bless`ed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identify unreachable subpatterns more reliably
In https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80104 I used `Span`s to identify unreachable sub-patterns in the presence of or-patterns during exhaustiveness checking. In https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80501 it was revealed that `Span`s are complicated and that this was not a good idea.
Instead, this PR identifies subpatterns logically: as a path in the tree of subpatterns of a given pattern. I made a struct that captures a set of such subpatterns. This is a bit complex, but thankfully self-contained; the rest of the code does not need to know anything about it.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80501. I think I managed to keep the perf neutral.
r? `@varkor`
|
|
|
