about summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/tests/ui/deriving/deriving-all-codegen.stdout
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorLines
2025-06-02Separately check equality of the scalar types and compound types in the ↵Ell-0/+165
order of declaration.
2024-07-27built-in derive: remove BYTE_SLICE_IN_PACKED_STRUCT_WITH_DERIVE hack and lintRalf Jung-20/+0
2024-04-23Do not add leading asterisk in the `PartialEq`Daniel Sedlak-8/+32
Adding leading asterisk can cause compilation failure for the _types_ that don't implement the `Copy`.
2024-04-14builtin-derive: tag → discriminantRalf Jung-47/+47
2024-02-16[AUTO-GENERATED] Migrate ui tests from `//` to `//@` directives许杰友 Jieyou Xu (Joe)-3/+3
2024-01-24remove StructuralEq traitRalf Jung-28/+0
2023-11-09Emit #[inline] on derive(Debug)Ben Kimock-0/+15
2023-09-08Rework no_coverage to coverage(off)Andy Caldwell-14/+14
2023-07-16Generate safe stable code for derives on empty enumsDavid Tolnay-9/+5
Generate `match *self {}` instead of `unsafe { core::intrinsics::unreachable() }`. This is: 1. safe 2. stable for the benefit of everyone looking at these derived impls through `cargo expand`. Both expansions compile to the same code at all optimization levels (including `0`).
2023-05-26Inline derived `hash` function.Nicholas Nethercote-0/+15
Because most of the other derived functions are inlined: `clone`, `default`, `eq`, `partial_cmp`, `cmp`. The exception is `fmt`, but it tends to not be on hot paths as much.
2023-02-02Don't generate unecessary `&&self.field` in deriving Debugclubby789-7/+7
2023-02-01Fix syntax in `-Zunpretty-expanded` output for derived `PartialEq`.Nicholas Nethercote-3/+3
If you do `derive(PartialEq)` on a packed struct, the output shown by `-Zunpretty=expanded` includes expressions like this: ``` { self.x } == { other.x } ``` This is invalid syntax. This doesn't break compilation, because the AST nodes are constructed within the compiler. But it does mean anyone using `-Zunpretty=expanded` output as a guide for hand-written impls could get a nasty surprise. This commit fixes things by instead using this form: ``` ({ self.x }) == ({ other.x }) ```
2023-01-30Allow more deriving on packed structs.Nicholas Nethercote-68/+445
Currently, deriving on packed structs has some non-trivial limitations, related to the fact that taking references on unaligned fields is UB. The current approach to field accesses in derived code: - Normal case: `&self.0` - In a packed struct that derives `Copy`: `&{self.0}` - In a packed struct that doesn't derive `Copy`: `&self.0` Plus, we disallow deriving any builtin traits other than `Default` for any packed generic type, because it's possible that there might be misaligned fields. This is a fairly broad restriction. Plus, we disallow deriving any builtin traits other than `Default` for most packed types that don't derive `Copy`. (The exceptions are those where the alignments inherently satisfy the packing, e.g. in a type with `repr(packed(N))` where all the fields have alignments of `N` or less anyway. Such types are pretty strange, because the `packed` attribute is not having any effect.) This commit introduces a new, simpler approach to field accesses: - Normal case: `&self.0` - In a packed struct: `&{self.0}` In the latter case, this requires that all fields impl `Copy`, which is a new restriction. This means that the following example compiles under the old approach and doesn't compile under the new approach. ``` #[derive(Debug)] struct NonCopy(u8); #[derive(Debug) #[repr(packed)] struct MyType(NonCopy); ``` (Note that the old approach's support for cases like this was brittle. Changing the `u8` to a `u16` would be enough to stop it working. So not much capability is lost here.) However, the other constraints from the old rules are removed. We can now derive builtin traits for packed generic structs like this: ``` trait Trait { type A; } #[derive(Hash)] #[repr(packed)] pub struct Foo<T: Trait>(T, T::A); ``` To allow this, we add a `T: Copy` bound in the derived impl and a `T::A: Copy` bound in where clauses. So `T` and `T::A` must impl `Copy`. We can now also derive builtin traits for packed structs that don't derive `Copy`, so long as the fields impl `Copy`: ``` #[derive(Hash)] #[repr(packed)] pub struct Foo(u32); ``` This includes types that hand-impl `Copy` rather than deriving it, such as the following, that show up in winapi-0.2: ``` #[derive(Clone)] #[repr(packed)] struct MyType(i32); impl Copy for MyType {} ``` The new approach is simpler to understand and implement, and it avoids the need for the `unsafe_derive_on_repr_packed` check. One exception is required for backwards-compatibility: we allow `[u8]` fields for now. There is a new lint for this, `byte_slice_in_packed_struct_with_derive`.
2023-01-28Auto merge of #103659 - clubby789:improve-partialord-derive, r=nagisabors-28/+23
Special-case deriving `PartialOrd` for enums with dataless variants I was able to get slightly better codegen by flipping the derived `PartialOrd` logic for two-variant enums. I also tried to document the implementation of the derive macro to make the special-case logic a little clearer. ```rs #[derive(PartialEq, PartialOrd)] pub enum A<T> { A, B(T) } ``` ```diff impl<T: ::core::cmp::PartialOrd> ::core::cmp::PartialOrd for A<T> { #[inline] fn partial_cmp( &self, other: &A<T>, ) -> ::core::option::Option<::core::cmp::Ordering> { let __self_tag = ::core::intrinsics::discriminant_value(self); let __arg1_tag = ::core::intrinsics::discriminant_value(other); - match ::core::cmp::PartialOrd::partial_cmp(&__self_tag, &__arg1_tag) { - ::core::option::Option::Some(::core::cmp::Ordering::Equal) => { - match (self, other) { - (A::B(__self_0), A::B(__arg1_0)) => { - ::core::cmp::PartialOrd::partial_cmp(__self_0, __arg1_0) - } - _ => ::core::option::Option::Some(::core::cmp::Ordering::Equal), - } + match (self, other) { + (A::B(__self_0), A::B(__arg1_0)) => { + ::core::cmp::PartialOrd::partial_cmp(__self_0, __arg1_0) } - cmp => cmp, + _ => ::core::cmp::PartialOrd::partial_cmp(&__self_tag, &__arg1_tag), } } } ``` Godbolt: [Current](https://godbolt.org/z/GYjEzG1T8), [New](https://godbolt.org/z/GoK78qx15) I'm not sure how common a case comparing two enums like this (such as `Option`) is, and if it's worth the slowdown of adding a special case to the derive. If it causes overall regressions it might be worth just manually implementing this for `Option`.
2023-01-19Special case `derive(Debug)` for fieldless enumsclubby789-5/+6
2023-01-15Special case deriving `PartialOrd` for certain enum layoutsclubby789-28/+23
2023-01-11Move /src/test to /testsAlbert Larsan-0/+1073