| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Shorten def_span for more items.
The `def_span` query only returns the signature span for functions.
Struct/enum/union definitions can also have a very long body.
This PR shortens the associated span.
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #97488 (Suggest blanket impl to the local traits)
- #98585 (Make `ThinBox<T>` covariant in `T`)
- #98644 (fix ICE with -Wrust-2021-incompatible-closure-captures)
- #98739 (fix grammar in useless doc comment lint)
- #98741 (Many small deriving cleanups)
- #98756 (Use const instead of function and make it private)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
|
|
r=lcnr
fix ICE with -Wrust-2021-incompatible-closure-captures
Fixes #93117
Fixes #96258
|
|
Rewrite dead-code pass to avoid fetching HIR.
This allows to get a more uniform handling of spans, and to simplify the grouping of diagnostics for variants and fields.
|
|
Fixes #93117
Fixes #96258
|
|
|
|
r=compiler-errors
Point to type parameter definition when not finding variant, method and associated item
fixes #77391
|
|
r=estebank
Improve suggestion for calling fn-like expr on type mismatch
1.) Suggest calling values of with RPIT types (and probably TAIT) when we expect `Ty` and have `impl Fn() -> Ty`
2.) Suggest calling closures even when they're not assigned to a local variable first
3.) Drive-by fix of a pretty-printing bug (`impl Fn()-> Ty` => `impl Fn() -> Ty`)
r? ```@estebank```
|
|
|
|
use `def_ident_span` , `body_owner_def_id` instead of `in_progress_typeck_results`, `guess_head_span`
use `body_id.owner` directly
add description to label
|
|
|
|
add comments in `store_dead_field_or_variant`
support multiple log level
add a item ident label
fix ui tests
fix a ui test
fix a rustdoc ui test
use let chain
refactor: remove `store_dead_field_or_variant`
fix a tiny bug
|
|
|
|
Handle `def_ident_span` like `def_span`.
`def_ident_span` had an ad-hoc status in the compiler.
This PR refactors it to be a first-class citizen like `def_span`:
- it gets encoded in the main metadata loop, instead of the visitor;
- its implementation is updated to mirror the one of `def_span`.
We do not remove the `Option` in the return type, since some items do not have an ident, AnonConsts for instance.
|
|
|
|
The test relies on library/std/src/error.rs not corresponding to a local
path, but remapping might still find the related local file of a
remapped path. To fix the test, this adds a new -Z flag to disable
finding the corresponding local path of a remapped path.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Co-authored-by: Ross MacArthur <ross@macarthur.io>
|
|
|
|
the right path
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When encountering an unsatisfied trait bound, if there are no other
suggestions, mention all the types that *do* implement that trait:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `f32: Foo` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:22:6
|
LL | impl Baz<f32> for f32 { }
| ^^^^^^^^ the trait `Foo` is not implemented for `f32`
|
= help: the following other types implement trait `Foo`:
Option<T>
i32
str
note: required by a bound in `Baz`
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:18:31
|
LL | trait Baz<U: ?Sized> where U: Foo { }
| ^^^ required by this bound in `Baz`
```
Mention implementers of traits in `ImplObligation`s.
Do not mention other `impl`s for closures, ranges and `?`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Main motivation: Fixes some issues with the current behavior. This PR is
more-or-less completely re-implementing the unused_unsafe lint; it’s also only
done in the MIR-version of the lint, the set of tests for the `-Zthir-unsafeck`
version no longer succeeds (and is thus disabled, see `lint-unused-unsafe.rs`).
On current nightly,
```rs
unsafe fn unsf() {}
fn inner_ignored() {
unsafe {
#[allow(unused_unsafe)]
unsafe {
unsf()
}
}
}
```
doesn’t create any warnings. This situation is not unrealistic to come by, the
inner `unsafe` block could e.g. come from a macro. Actually, this PR even
includes removal of one unused `unsafe` in the standard library that was missed
in a similar situation. (The inner `unsafe` coming from an external macro hides
the warning, too.)
The reason behind this problem is how the check currently works:
* While generating MIR, it already skips nested unsafe blocks (i.e. unsafe
nested in other unsafe) so that the inner one is always the one considered
unused
* To differentiate the cases of no unsafe operations inside the `unsafe` vs.
a surrounding `unsafe` block, there’s some ad-hoc magic walking up the HIR to
look for surrounding used `unsafe` blocks.
There’s a lot of problems with this approach besides the one presented above.
E.g. the MIR-building uses checks for `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` lint to decide
early whether or not `unsafe` blocks in an `unsafe fn` are redundant and ought
to be removed.
```rs
unsafe fn granular_disallow_op_in_unsafe_fn() {
unsafe {
#[deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]
{
unsf();
}
}
}
```
```
error: call to unsafe function is unsafe and requires unsafe block (error E0133)
--> src/main.rs:13:13
|
13 | unsf();
| ^^^^^^ call to unsafe function
|
note: the lint level is defined here
--> src/main.rs:11:16
|
11 | #[deny(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
= note: consult the function's documentation for information on how to avoid undefined behavior
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:10:5
|
9 | unsafe fn granular_disallow_op_in_unsafe_fn() {
| --------------------------------------------- because it's nested under this `unsafe` fn
10 | unsafe {
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
|
= note: `#[warn(unused_unsafe)]` on by default
```
Here, the intermediate `unsafe` was ignored, even though it contains a unsafe
operation that is not allowed to happen in an `unsafe fn` without an additional `unsafe` block.
Also closures were problematic and the workaround/algorithms used on current
nightly didn’t work properly. (I skipped trying to fully understand what it was
supposed to do, because this PR uses a completely different approach.)
```rs
fn nested() {
unsafe {
unsafe { unsf() }
}
}
```
```
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:10:9
|
9 | unsafe {
| ------ because it's nested under this `unsafe` block
10 | unsafe { unsf() }
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
|
= note: `#[warn(unused_unsafe)]` on by default
```
vs
```rs
fn nested() {
let _ = || unsafe {
let _ = || unsafe { unsf() };
};
}
```
```
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:9:16
|
9 | let _ = || unsafe {
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
|
= note: `#[warn(unused_unsafe)]` on by default
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:10:20
|
10 | let _ = || unsafe { unsf() };
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
```
*note that this warning kind-of suggests that **both** unsafe blocks are redundant*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I also dislike the fact that it always suggests keeping the outermost `unsafe`.
E.g. for
```rs
fn granularity() {
unsafe {
unsafe { unsf() }
unsafe { unsf() }
unsafe { unsf() }
}
}
```
I prefer if `rustc` suggests removing the more-course outer-level `unsafe`
instead of the fine-grained inner `unsafe` blocks, which it currently does on nightly:
```
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:10:9
|
9 | unsafe {
| ------ because it's nested under this `unsafe` block
10 | unsafe { unsf() }
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
|
= note: `#[warn(unused_unsafe)]` on by default
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:11:9
|
9 | unsafe {
| ------ because it's nested under this `unsafe` block
10 | unsafe { unsf() }
11 | unsafe { unsf() }
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:12:9
|
9 | unsafe {
| ------ because it's nested under this `unsafe` block
...
12 | unsafe { unsf() }
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
```
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Needless to say, this PR addresses all these points. For context, as far as my
understanding goes, the main advantage of skipping inner unsafe blocks was that
a test case like
```rs
fn top_level_used() {
unsafe {
unsf();
unsafe { unsf() }
unsafe { unsf() }
unsafe { unsf() }
}
}
```
should generate some warning because there’s redundant nested `unsafe`, however
every single `unsafe` block _does_ contain some statement that uses it. Of course
this PR doesn’t aim change the warnings on this kind of code example, because
the current behavior, warning on all the inner `unsafe` blocks, makes sense in this case.
As mentioned, during MIR building all the unsafe blocks *are* kept now, and usage
is attributed to them. The way to still generate a warning like
```
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:11:9
|
9 | unsafe {
| ------ because it's nested under this `unsafe` block
10 | unsf();
11 | unsafe { unsf() }
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
|
= note: `#[warn(unused_unsafe)]` on by default
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:12:9
|
9 | unsafe {
| ------ because it's nested under this `unsafe` block
...
12 | unsafe { unsf() }
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
warning: unnecessary `unsafe` block
--> src/main.rs:13:9
|
9 | unsafe {
| ------ because it's nested under this `unsafe` block
...
13 | unsafe { unsf() }
| ^^^^^^ unnecessary `unsafe` block
```
in this case is by emitting a `unused_unsafe` warning for all of the `unsafe`
blocks that are _within a **used** unsafe block_.
The previous code had a little HIR traversal already anyways to collect a set of
all the unsafe blocks (in order to afterwards determine which ones are unused
afterwards). This PR uses such a traversal to do additional things including logic
like _always_ warn for an `unsafe` block that’s inside of another **used**
unsafe block. The traversal is expanded to include nested closures in the same go,
this simplifies a lot of things.
The whole logic around `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` is a little complicated, there’s
some test cases of corner-cases in this PR. (The implementation involves
differentiating between whether a used unsafe block was used exclusively by
operations where `allow(unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn)` was active.) The main goal was
to make sure that code should compile successfully if all the `unused_unsafe`-warnings
are addressed _simultaneously_ (by removing the respective `unsafe` blocks)
no matter how complicated the patterns of `unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn` being
disallowed and allowed throughout the function are.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One noteworthy design decision I took here: An `unsafe` block
with `allow(unused_unsafe)` **is considered used** for the purposes of
linting about redundant contained unsafe blocks. So while
```rs
fn granularity() {
unsafe { //~ ERROR: unnecessary `unsafe` block
unsafe { unsf() }
unsafe { unsf() }
unsafe { unsf() }
}
}
```
warns for the outer `unsafe` block,
```rs
fn top_level_ignored() {
#[allow(unused_unsafe)]
unsafe {
#[deny(unused_unsafe)]
{
unsafe { unsf() } //~ ERROR: unnecessary `unsafe` block
unsafe { unsf() } //~ ERROR: unnecessary `unsafe` block
unsafe { unsf() } //~ ERROR: unnecessary `unsafe` block
}
}
}
```
warns on the inner ones.
|
|
Improve string concatenation suggestion
Before:
error[E0369]: cannot add `&str` to `&str`
--> file.rs:2:22
|
2 | let _x = "hello" + " world";
| ------- ^ -------- &str
| | |
| | `+` cannot be used to concatenate two `&str` strings
| &str
|
help: `to_owned()` can be used to create an owned `String` from a string reference. String concatenation appends the string on the right to the string on the left and may require reallocation. This requires ownership of the string on the left
|
2 | let _x = "hello".to_owned() + " world";
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
After:
error[E0369]: cannot add `&str` to `&str`
--> file.rs:2:22
|
2 | let _x = "hello" + " world";
| ------- ^ -------- &str
| | |
| | `+` cannot be used to concatenate two `&str` strings
| &str
|
= note: string concatenation requires an owned `String` on the left
help: create an owned `String` from a string reference
|
2 | let _x = "hello".to_owned() + " world";
| +++++++++++
|
|
|
|
|
|
Link impl items to corresponding trait items in late resolver.
Hygienically linking trait impl items to declarations in the trait can be done directly by the late resolver. In fact, it is already done to diagnose unknown items.
This PR uses this resolution work and stores the `DefId` of the trait item in the HIR. This avoids having to do this resolution manually later.
r? `@matthewjasper`
Related to #90639. The added `trait_item_id` field can be moved to `ImplItemRef` to be used directly by your PR.
|
|
|
|
This should make it easier to read.
|
|
Now, multipart suggestions are used instead of `span_to_snippet`, which
improves code quality, makes the suggestion work even without access to
source code, and, most importantly, improves the rendering of the
suggestion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tidy run
update invalid crate attributes, improve error
update test outputs
de-capitalise error
update tests
Update invalid crate attributes, add help message
Update - generate span without using BytePos
Add correct dependancies
Update - generate suggestion without BytePos
Tidy run
update tests
Generate Suggestion without BytePos
Add all builtin attributes
add err builtin inner attr at top of crate
fix tests
add err builtin inner attr at top of crate
tidy fix
add err builtin inner attr at top of crate
|
|
|
|
|
|
When encountering a binop where the types would have been accepted, if
all the predicates had been fulfilled, include information about the
predicates and suggest appropriate `#[derive]`s if possible.
Point at trait(s) that needs to be `impl`emented.
|
|
Use larger span for adjustment THIR expressions
Currently, we use a relatively 'small' span for THIR
expressions generated by an 'adjustment' (e.g. an autoderef,
autoborrow, unsizing). As a result, if a borrow generated
by an adustment ends up causing a borrowcheck error, for example:
```rust
let mut my_var = String::new();
let my_ref = &my_var
my_var.push('a');
my_ref;
```
then the span for the mutable borrow may end up referring
to only the base expression (e.g. `my_var`), rather than
the method call which triggered the mutable borrow
(e.g. `my_var.push('a')`)
Due to a quirk of the MIR borrowck implementation,
this doesn't always get exposed in migration mode,
but it does in many cases.
This commit makes THIR building consistently use 'larger'
spans for adjustment expressions. These spans are recoded
when we first create the adjustment during typecheck. For
example, an autoref adjustment triggered by a method call
will record the span of the entire method call.
The intent of this change it make it clearer to users
when it's the specific way in which a variable is
used (for example, in a method call) that produdes
a borrowcheck error. For example, an error message
claiming that a 'mutable borrow occurs here' might
be confusing if it just points at a usage of a variable
(e.g. `my_var`), when no `&mut` is in sight. Pointing
at the entire expression should help to emphasize
that the method call itself is responsible for
the mutable borrow.
In several cases, this makes the `#![feature(nll)]` diagnostic
output match up exactly with the default (migration mode) output.
As a result, several `.nll.stderr` files end up getting removed
entirely.
|
|
Fix incorrect disambiguation suggestion for associated items
Fixes #88806. I have not added a new test case, because the erroneous behavior is already present in existing test cases.
|
|
|
|
|
