| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Shrink span for bindings with subpatterns.
Bindings with nested patterns (`binding @ pat` syntax) currently point to the full pattern. This PR proposes to shrink the span to stop before the ````@`.``` This makes the diagnostics for move/mutability conflicts clearer, as they not point to the `binding` only, instead of the full pat.
r? ```@estebank```
|
|
|
|
|
|
This PR will fix some typos detected by [typos].
I only picked the ones I was sure were spelling errors to fix, mostly in
the comments.
[typos]: https://github.com/crate-ci/typos
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adding suggestion for E0530
Closes #98974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #97249 (`<details>`/`<summary>` UI fixes)
- #98418 (Allow macOS to build LLVM as shared library)
- #98460 (Use CSS variables to handle theming)
- #98497 (Improve some inference diagnostics)
- #98708 (rustdoc: fix 98690 Panic if invalid path for -Z persist-doctests)
Failed merges:
- #98761 (more `need_type_info` improvements)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
r=compiler-errors
Fix suggestions for `&a: T` parameters
I've accidentally discovered that we have broken suggestions for `&a: T` parameters:
```rust
fn f(&mut bar: u32) {}
fn main() {
let _ = |&mut a| ();
}
```
```text
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> ./t.rs:1:6
|
1 | fn f(&mut bar: u32) {}
| ^^^^^^^^-----
| | |
| | expected due to this
| expected `u32`, found `&mut _`
| help: did you mean `bar`: `&u32`
|
= note: expected type `u32`
found mutable reference `&mut _`
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> ./t.rs:4:23
|
4 | let _: fn(u32) = |&mut a| ();
| ^^^^^--
| | |
| | expected due to this
| expected `u32`, found `&mut _`
| help: did you mean `a`: `&u32`
|
= note: expected type `u32`
found mutable reference `&mut _`
```
It's hard to see, but
1. The help span is overlapping with "expected" spans
2. It suggests `fn f( &u32) {}` (no `mut` and lost parameter name) and `|&u32 ()` (no closing `|` and lost parameter name)
I've tried to fix this.
r? ``@compiler-errors``
|
|
Previously we were suggesting stuff like `fn f( &u32) {}`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This attempts to bring better error messages to invalid method calls, by applying some heuristics to identify common mistakes.
The algorithm is inspired by Levenshtein distance and longest common sub-sequence. In essence, we treat the types of the function, and the types of the arguments you provided as two "words" and compute the edits to get from one to the other.
We then modify that algorithm to detect 4 cases:
- A function input is missing
- An extra argument was provided
- The type of an argument is straight up invalid
- Two arguments have been swapped
- A subset of the arguments have been shuffled
(We detect the last two as separate cases so that we can detect two swaps, instead of 4 parameters permuted.)
It helps to understand this argument by paying special attention to terminology: "inputs" refers to the inputs being *expected* by the function, and "arguments" refers to what has been provided at the call site.
The basic sketch of the algorithm is as follows:
- Construct a boolean grid, with a row for each argument, and a column for each input. The cell [i, j] is true if the i'th argument could satisfy the j'th input.
- If we find an argument that could satisfy no inputs, provided for an input that can't be satisfied by any other argument, we consider this an "invalid type".
- Extra arguments are those that can't satisfy any input, provided for an input that *could* be satisfied by another argument.
- Missing inputs are inputs that can't be satisfied by any argument, where the provided argument could satisfy another input
- Swapped / Permuted arguments are identified with a cycle detection algorithm.
As each issue is found, we remove the relevant inputs / arguments and check for more issues. If we find no issues, we match up any "valid" arguments, and start again.
Note that there's a lot of extra complexity:
- We try to stay efficient on the happy path, only computing the diagonal until we find a problem, and then filling in the rest of the matrix.
- Closure arguments are wrapped in a tuple and need to be unwrapped
- We need to resolve closure types after the rest, to allow the most specific type constraints
- We need to handle imported C functions that might be variadic in their inputs.
I tried to document a lot of this in comments in the code and keep the naming clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
