about summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/tests/ui/parser
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorLines
2025-05-03Just suggest positional arg and adjust issue0139104 ui testxizheyin-29/+84
Signed-off-by: xizheyin <xizheyin@smail.nju.edu.cn>
2025-04-30compiletest: Make diagnostic kind mandatory on line annotationsVadim Petrochenkov-70/+77
2025-04-25resolved conflictKivooeo-0/+73
2025-04-25Check if format argument is identifier to avoid error err-emitxizheyin-43/+19
Signed-off-by: xizheyin <xizheyin@smail.nju.edu.cn>
2025-04-25Add ui test parser/issues/invalid-parse-format-issue-139104.rsxizheyin-0/+74
Signed-off-by: xizheyin <xizheyin@smail.nju.edu.cn>
2025-04-24Rollup merge of #140228 - fmease:revert-overzealous-colon-recovery, r=jieyouxuMatthias Krüger-0/+22
Revert overzealous parse recovery for single colons in paths Basically manually reverts #136808, cc ``@chenyukang`` ``@estebank.`` Reopens #129273. Fixes [after beta backport] #140227.
2025-04-24Revert overzealous parse recovery for single colonsLeón Orell Valerian Liehr-0/+22
2025-04-22Rollup merge of #139921 - Kivooeo:master, r=WaffleLapkinChris Denton-23/+98
improve diagnostic for raw pointer field access with -> This PR enhances the error messages emitted by the Rust compiler when users attempt to use the `->` operator for field access on raw pointers or when dereferencing is needed. The changes aim to provide clearer guidance, by suggesting the correct use of the `.` operator and explicit dereferencing. **Before:** ``` help: `xs` is a raw pointer; try dereferencing it | LL | (*xs)->count += 1; | ++ + ``` **Now:** ``` help: use `.` on a dereferenced raw pointer instead | LL - xs->count += 1; LL + (*xs).count += 1; | ``` I added extra clarification in the message. Since this error occurs in the parser, we can't be certain that the type is a raw pointer. That's why the message includes only a small note in brackets. (In contrast, the message above is emitted in HIR, where we *can* check whether it's a raw pointer.) **Before:** ``` --> main.rs:11:11 | 11 | xs->count += 1; | ^^ | = help: the . operator will dereference the value if needed ``` **After:** ``` --> main.rs:11:11 | 11 | xs->count += 1; | ^^ | = help: the `.` operator will automatically dereference the value, except if the value is a raw pointer ```
2025-04-22improve diagnostic for raw pointer field access using `->`Kivooeo-23/+98
2025-04-18Remove let_chains feature gate from even more testsest31-12/+11
2025-04-17Rollup merge of #139967 - jieyouxu:auxiliary, r=wesleywiserMatthias Krüger-4/+3
Introduce and use specialized `//@ ignore-auxiliary` for test support files instead of using `//@ ignore-test` ### Summary Add a semantically meaningful directive for ignoring test *auxiliary* files. This is for auxiliary files that *participate* in actual tests but should not be built by `compiletest` (i.e. these files are involved through `mod xxx;` or `include!()` or `#[path = "xxx"]`, etc.). ### Motivation A specialized directive like `//@ ignore-auxiliary` makes it way easier to audit disabled tests via `//@ ignore-test`. - These support files cannot use the canonical `auxiliary/` dir because they participate in module resolution or are included, or their relative paths can be important for test intention otherwise. Follow-up to: - #139705 - #139783 - #139740 See also discussions in: - [#t-compiler > Directive name for non-test aux files?](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/Directive.20name.20for.20non-test.20aux.20files.3F/with/512773817) - [#t-compiler > Handling disabled &#96;//@ ignore-test&#96; tests](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/Handling.20disabled.20.60.2F.2F.40.20ignore-test.60.20tests/with/512005974) - [#t-compiler/meetings > &#91;steering&#93; 2025-04-11 Dealing with disabled tests](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/238009-t-compiler.2Fmeetings/topic/.5Bsteering.5D.202025-04-11.20Dealing.20with.20disabled.20tests/with/511717981) ### Remarks on remaining unconditionally disabled tests under `tests/` After this PR, against commit 79a272c6402, only **14** remaining test files are disabled through `//@ ignore-test`: <details> <summary>Remaining `//@ ignore-test` files under `tests/`</summary> ``` tests/debuginfo/drop-locations.rs 4://@ ignore-test (broken, see #128971) tests/rustdoc/macro-document-private-duplicate.rs 1://@ ignore-test (fails spuriously, see issue #89228) tests/rustdoc/inline_cross/assoc-const-equality.rs 3://@ ignore-test (FIXME: #125092) tests/ui/match/issue-27021.rs 7://@ ignore-test (#54987) tests/ui/match/issue-26996.rs 7://@ ignore-test (#54987) tests/ui/issues/issue-49298.rs 9://@ ignore-test (#54987) tests/ui/issues/issue-59756.rs 2://@ ignore-test (rustfix needs multiple suggestions) tests/ui/precondition-checks/write.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/precondition-checks/read.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/precondition-checks/write_bytes.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/explicit-tail-calls/drop-order.rs 2://@ ignore-test: tail calls are not implemented in rustc_codegen_ssa yet, so this causes 🧊 tests/ui/panics/panic-short-backtrace-windows-x86_64.rs 3://@ ignore-test (#92000) tests/ui/json/json-bom-plus-crlf-multifile-aux.rs 3://@ ignore-test Not a test. Used by other tests tests/ui/traits/next-solver/object-soundness-requires-generalization.rs 2://@ ignore-test (see #114196) ``` </details> Of these, most are either **unimplemented**, or **spurious**, or **known-broken**. The outstanding one is `tests/ui/json/json-bom-plus-crlf-multifile-aux.rs` which I did not want to touch in *this* PR -- that aux file has load-bearing BOM and carriage returns and byte offset matters. I think those test files that require special encoding / BOM probably are better off as `run-make` tests. See #139968 for that aux file. ### Review advice - Best reviewed commit-by-commit. - The directive name diverged from the most voted `//@ auxiliary` because I think that's easy to confuse with `//@ aux-{crate,dir}`. r? compiler
2025-04-17tests: use `//@ ignore-auxiliary` with backlinked primary test fileJieyou Xu-4/+3
2025-04-17Auto merge of #139949 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-pxc5tsx, r=matthiaskrgrbors-173/+173
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #138632 (Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals`) - #139416 (unstable book; document `macro_metavar_expr_concat`) - #139782 (Consistent with treating Ctor Call as Struct in liveness analysis) - #139885 (document RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP, RUSTC_OVERRIDE_VERSION_STRING, and -Z allow-features in the unstable book) - #139904 (Explicitly annotate edition for `unpretty=expanded` and `unpretty=hir` tests) - #139932 (transmutability: Refactor tests for simplicity) - #139944 (Move eager translation to a method on Diag) - #139948 (git: ignore `60600a6fa403216bfd66e04f948b1822f6450af7` for blame purposes) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
2025-04-17Auto merge of #139940 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-rd4d3fn, r=matthiaskrgrbors-61/+189
Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - #135340 (Add `explicit_extern_abis` Feature and Enforce Explicit ABIs) - #139440 (rustc_target: RISC-V: feature addition batch 2) - #139667 (cfi: Remove #[no_sanitize(cfi)] for extern weak functions) - #139828 (Don't require rigid alias's trait to hold) - #139854 (Improve parse errors for stray lifetimes in type position) - #139889 (Clean UI tests 3 of n) - #139894 (Fix `opt-dist` CLI flag and make it work without LLD) - #139900 (stepping into impls for normalization is unproductive) - #139915 (replace some #[rustc_intrinsic] usage with use of the libcore declarations) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
2025-04-17Rollup merge of #138632 - clubby789:stabilize-cfg-boolean-lit, ↵Matthias Krüger-173/+173
r=davidtwco,Urgau,traviscross Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals` Closes #131204 `@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated This will end up conflicting with the test in #138293 so whichever doesn't land first will need updating -- # Stabilization Report ## General design ### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized? [RFC 3695](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695), none. ### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con. None ### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those? None ## Has a call-for-testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received? Yes; only positive feedback was received. ## Implementation quality ### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs) Implemented in [#131034](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131034). ### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature - [Basic usage, including `#[cfg()]`, `cfg!()` and `#[cfg_attr()]`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6d71251cf9e40326461f90f8ff9a7024706aea87/tests/ui/cfg/true-false.rs) - [`--cfg=true/false` on the command line being accessible via `r#true/r#false`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6d71251cf9e40326461f90f8ff9a7024706aea87/tests/ui/cfg/raw-true-false.rs) - [Interaction with the unstable `#[doc(cfg(..))]` feature](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/rustdoc-ui/cfg-boolean-literal.rs) - [Denying `--check-cfg=cfg(true/false)`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/ui/check-cfg/invalid-arguments.rs) - Ensuring `--cfg false` on the command line doesn't change the meaning of `cfg(false)`: `tests/ui/cfg/cmdline-false.rs` - Ensuring both `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)` on the same item result in it being disabled: `tests/ui/cfg/both-true-false.rs` ### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking? The above mentioned issue; it should not block as it interacts with another unstable feature. ### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there? None ### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization - `@clubby789` (RFC) - `@Urgau` (Implementation in rustc) ### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done? `rustdoc`'s unstable`#[doc(cfg(..)]` has been updated to respect it. `cargo` has been updated with a forward compatibility lint to enable supporting it in cargo once stabilized. ## Type system and execution rules ### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist) A few lines to be added to the reference for configuration predicates, specified in the RFC.
2025-04-17Rollup merge of #139854 - fmease:modern-diag-for-lt-in-ty, r=davidtwcoMatthias Krüger-58/+186
Improve parse errors for stray lifetimes in type position While technically & syntactically speaking lifetimes do begin[^1] types in type contexts (this essentially excludes generic argument lists) and require a following `+` to form a complete type (`'a +` denotes a bare trait object type), the likelihood that a user meant to write a lifetime-prefixed bare trait object type in *modern* editions (Rust ≥2021) when placing a lifetime into a type context is incredibly low (they would need to add at least three tokens to turn it into a *semantically* well-formed TOT: `'a` → `dyn 'a + Trait`). Therefore let's *lie* in modern editions (just like in PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131239, a precedent if you will) by stating "*expected type, found lifetime*" in such cases which is a lot more a approachable, digestible and friendly compared to "*lifetime in trait object type must be followed by `+`*" (as added in PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/69760). I've also added recovery for "ampersand-less" reference types (e.g., `'a ()`, `'a mut Ty`) in modern editions because it was trivial to do and I think it's not unlikely to occur in practice. Fixes #133413. [^1]: For example, in the context of decl macros, this implies that a lone `'a` always matches syntax fragment `ty` ("even if" there's a later macro matcher expecting syntax fragment `lifetime`). Rephrased, lifetimes (in type contexts) *commit* to the type parser.
2025-04-17Rollup merge of #135340 - obeis:explicit-extern-abis, r=traviscross,nadrierilMatthias Krüger-3/+3
Add `explicit_extern_abis` Feature and Enforce Explicit ABIs The unstable `explicit_extern_abis` feature is introduced, requiring explicit ABIs in `extern` blocks. Hard errors will be enforced with this feature enabled in a future edition. RFC rust-lang/rfcs#3722 Update #134986
2025-04-16Add test for `extern` without explicit ABIObei Sideg-3/+3
2025-04-16Remove old diagnostic notes for type ascription syntaxZalathar-21/+0
Type ascription syntax was removed in 2023.
2025-04-15Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type)León Orell Valerian Liehr-27/+23
Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/*ERROR*/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`).
2025-04-15Improve parse errors for lifetimes in type positionLeón Orell Valerian Liehr-33/+165
2025-04-14Rollup merge of #139392 - compiler-errors:raw-expr, r=oli-obkMatthias Krüger-0/+140
Detect and provide suggestion for `&raw EXPR` When emitting an error in the parser, and we detect that the previous token was `raw` and we *could* have consumed `const`/`mut`, suggest that this may have been a mistyped raw ref expr. To do this, we add `const`/`mut` to the expected token set when parsing `&raw` as an expression (which does not affect the "good path" of parsing, for the record). This is kind of a rudimentary error improvement, since it doesn't actually attempt to recover anything, leading to some other knock-on errors b/c we still treat `&raw` as the expression that was parsed... but at least we add the suggestion! I don't think the parser grammar means we can faithfully recover `&raw EXPR` early, i.e. during `parse_expr_borrow`. Fixes #133231
2025-04-13UI tests: migrate remaining compile time `error-pattern`s to line annotationsVadim Petrochenkov-0/+0
when possible.
2025-04-13Rollup merge of #139618 - petrochenkov:virsugg, r=jieyouxuChris Denton-6/+8
compiletest: Make `SUGGESTION` annotations viral If one of them is expected in a test file, then others should be annotated as well, in the same way as with `HELP`s and `NOTE`s. This doesn't require much of an additional annotation burden, but simplifies the rules. r? ```@jieyouxu```
2025-04-11Auto merge of #139578 - ferrocene:pa-compiletest-edition, r=jieyouxubors-1/+1
Fix breakage when running compiletest with `--test-args=--edition=2015` Compiletest has an `--edition` flag to change the default edition tests are run with. Unfortunately no test suite successfully executes when that flag is passed. If the edition is set to something greater than 2015 the breakage is expected, since the test suite currently supports only edition 2015 (Ferrous Systems will open an MCP about fixing that soonish). Surprisingly, the test suite is also broken if `--edition=2015` is passed to compiletest. This PR focuses on fixing the latter. This PR fixes the two categories of failures happening when `--edition=2015` is passed: * Some edition-specific tests set their edition through `//@ compile-flags` instead of `//@ edition`. Compiletest doesn't parse the compile flags, so it would see no `//@ edition` and add another `--edition` flag, leading to a rustc error. * Compiletest would add the edition after `//@ compile-flags`, while some tests depend on flags passed to `//@ compile-flags` being the last flags in the rustc invocation. Note that for the first category, I opted to manually go and replace all `//@ compile-flags` setting an edition with an explicit `//@ edition`. We could've changed compiletest to instead check whether an edition was set in `//@ compile-flags`, but I thought it was better to enforce a consistent way to set the edition in tests. I also added the edition to the stamp, so that changing `--edition` results in tests being re-executed. r? `@jieyouxu`
2025-04-10compiletest: Trim the value of `dont-require-annotations`Vadim Petrochenkov-1/+1
2025-04-10compiletest: Make `SUGGESTION` annotations viralVadim Petrochenkov-6/+8
2025-04-10Rollup merge of #139568 - nnethercote:empty-trait-name, r=compiler-errorsMatthias Krüger-40/+24
Don't use empty trait names Helps with #137978. Details in individual commits. r? ```@davidtwco```
2025-04-10replace `//@ compile-flags: --edition` with `//@ edition`Pietro Albini-1/+1
2025-04-09Avoid an empty trait name in impl blocks.Nicholas Nethercote-40/+24
`resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope` checks for an empty name. Why is this necessary? Because `parse_item_impl` can produce an `impl` block with an empty trait name in some cases. This is pretty gross and very non-obvious. This commit avoids the use of the empty trait name. In one case the trait name is instead pulled from `TyKind::ImplTrait`, which prevents the output for `tests/ui/impl-trait/extra-impl-in-trait-impl.rs` from changing. In the other case we just fail the parse and don't try to recover. I think losing error recovery in this obscure case is worth the code cleanup. This change affects `tests/ui/parser/impl-parsing.rs`, which is split in two, and the obsolete `..` syntax cases are removed (they are tested elsewhere).
2025-04-09Auto merge of #139555 - petrochenkov:errkind-ann, r=jieyouxubors-32/+32
UI tests: add missing diagnostic kinds where possible The subset of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139427 that only adds diagnostic kinds to line annotations, without changing any other things in annotations or compiletest. After this only non-viral `NOTE`s and `HELP`s should be missing. r? `@jieyouxu`
2025-04-08UI tests: add missing diagnostic kinds where possibleVadim Petrochenkov-32/+32
2025-04-07compiletest: Avoid ignoring empty diagnostics in one more placeVadim Petrochenkov-0/+2
This catches some silly notes emitted by rustc, which should ideally be fixed
2025-04-04Detect and provide suggestion for `&raw EXPR`Michael Goulet-0/+140
2025-04-03Use `cfg(false)` in UI testsclubby789-173/+173
2025-04-03compiletest: Require `//~` annotations even if `error-pattern` is specifiedVadim Petrochenkov-75/+66
2025-04-02Remove `NtExpr` and `NtLiteral`.Nicholas Nethercote-10/+14
Notes about tests: - tests/ui/rfcs/rfc-2294-if-let-guard/feature-gate.rs: some messages are now duplicated due to repeated parsing. - tests/ui/rfcs/rfc-2497-if-let-chains/disallowed-positions.rs: ditto. - `tests/ui/proc-macro/macro-rules-derive-cfg.rs`: the diff looks large but the only difference is the insertion of a single invisible-delimited group around a metavar. - `tests/ui/attributes/nonterminal-expansion.rs`: a slight span degradation, somehow related to the recent massive attr parsing rewrite (#135726). I couldn't work out exactly what is going wrong, but I don't think it's worth holding things up for a single slightly suboptimal error message.
2025-04-01Auto merge of #138492 - lcnr:rm-inline_const_pat, r=oli-obkbors-180/+0
remove `feature(inline_const_pat)` Summarizing https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/144729-t-types/topic/remove.20feature.28inline_const_pat.29.20and.20shared.20borrowck. With https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/issues/129 we will start to borrowck items together with their typeck parent. This is necessary to correctly support opaque types, blocking the new solver and TAIT/ATPIT stabilization with the old one. This means that we cannot really support `inline_const_pat` as they are implemented right now: - we want to typeck inline consts together with their parent body to allow inference to flow both ways and to allow the const to refer to local regions of its parent.This means we also need to borrowck the inline const together with its parent as that's necessary to properly support opaque types - we want the inline const pattern to participate in exhaustiveness checking - to participate in exhaustiveness checking we need to evaluate it, which requires borrowck, which now relies on borrowck of the typeck root, which ends up checking exhaustiveness again. **This is a query cycle**. There are 4 possible ways to handle this: - stop typechecking inline const patterns together with their parent - causes inline const patterns to be different than inline const exprs - prevents bidirectional inference, we need to either fail to compile `if let const { 1 } = 1u32` or `if let const { 1u32 } = 1` - region inference for inline consts will be harder, it feels non-trivial to support inline consts referencing local regions from the parent fn - inline consts no longer participate in exhaustiveness checking. Treat them like `pat if pat == const { .. }` instead. We then only evaluate them after borrowck - difference between `const { 1 }` and `const FOO: usize = 1; match x { FOO => () }`. This is confusing - do they carry their weight if they are now just equivalent to using an if-guard - delay exhaustiveness checking until after borrowck - should be possible in theory, but is a quite involved change and may have some unexpected challenges - remove this feature for now I believe we should either delay exhaustiveness checking or remove the feature entirely. As moving exhaustiveness checking to after borrow checking is quite complex I think the right course of action is to fully remove the feature for now and to add it again once/if we've got that implementation figured out. `const { .. }`-expressions remain stable. These seem to have been the main motivation for https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/2920. r? types cc `@rust-lang/types` `@rust-lang/lang` #76001
2025-03-31Rollup merge of #138749 - compiler-errors:closure-recovery, r=fmeaseMatthias Krüger-4/+46
Fix closure recovery for missing block when return type is specified Firstly, fix the `is_array_like_block` condition to make sure we're actually recovering a mistyped *block* rather than some other delimited expression. This fixes #138748. Secondly, split out the recovery of missing braces on a closure body into a separate recovery. Right now, the suggestion `"you might have meant to write this as part of a block"` originates from `suggest_fixes_misparsed_for_loop_head`, which feels kinda brittle and coincidental since AFAICT that recovery wasn't ever really intended to fix this. We also can make this `MachineApplicable` in this case. Fixes #138748 r? `@fmease` or reassign if you're busy/don't wanna review this
2025-03-29compiletest: Support matching diagnostics on lines belowVadim Petrochenkov-47/+40
2025-03-27Rollup merge of #138844 - petrochenkov:cfgtrace2, r=nnethercoteJacob Pratt-24/+2
expand: Leave traces when expanding `cfg` attributes This is the same as https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138515, but for `cfg(true)` instead of `cfg_attr`. The difference is that `cfg(true)`s already left "traces" after themselves - the `cfg` attributes themselves, with `expanded_inert_attrs` set to true, with full tokens, available to proc macros. This is not a reasonably expected behavior, but it could not be removed without a replacement, because a [major rustdoc feature](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3631) and a number of clippy lints rely on it. This PR implements a replacement. This needs a crater run, because it changes observable behavior (in an intended way) - proc macros can no longer see expanded `cfg(true)` attributes. (Some minor unnecessary special casing for `sym::cfg_attr` is also removed in this PR.) r? `@nnethercote`
2025-03-26expand: Leave traces when expanding `cfg` attributesVadim Petrochenkov-24/+2
2025-03-26Rollup merge of #138898 - fmease:decrustify-parser-post-ty-ascr, ↵Stuart Cook-477/+388
r=compiler-errors Mostly parser: Eliminate code that's been dead / semi-dead since the removal of type ascription syntax **Disclaimer**: This PR is intended to mostly clean up code as opposed to bringing about behavioral changes. Therefore it doesn't aim to address any of the 'FIXME: remove after a month [dated: 2023-05-02]: "type ascription syntax has been removed, see issue [#]101728"'. --- By commit: 1. Removes truly dead code: * Since 1.71 (#109128) `let _ = { f: x };` is a syntax error as opposed to a semantic error which allows the parse-time diagnostic (suggestion) "*struct literal body without path // you might have forgotten […]*" to kick in. * The analysis-time diagnostic (suggestion) from <=1.70 "*cannot find value \`f\` in this scope // you might have forgotten […]*" is therefore no longer reachable. 2. Updates `is_certainly_not_a_block` to be in line with the current grammar: * The seq. `{ ident:` is definitely not the start of a block. Before the removal of ty ascr, `{ ident: ty_start` would begin a block expr. * This shouldn't make more code compile IINM, it should *ultimately* only affect diagnostics. * For example, `if T { f: () } {}` will now be interpreted as an `if` with struct lit `T { f: () }` as its *condition* (which is banned in the parser anyway) as opposed to just `T` (with the *consequent* being `f : ()` which is also invalid (since 1.71)). The diagnostics are almost the same because we have two separate parse recovery procedures + diagnostics: `StructLiteralNeedingParens` (*invalid struct lit*) before and `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere` (*struct lits aren't allowed here*) now, as you can see from the diff. * (As an aside, even before this PR, fn `maybe_suggest_struct_literal` should've just used the much older & clearer `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere`) * NB: This does sadly regress the compiler output for `tests/ui/parser/type-ascription-in-pattern.rs` but that can be fixed in follow-up PRs. It's not super important IMO and a natural consequence. 3. Removes code that's become dead due to the prior commit. * Basically reverts #106620 + #112475 (without regressing rustc's output!). * Now the older & more robust parse recovery procedure (cc `StructLiteralNotAllowedHere`) takes care of the cases the removed code used to handle. * This automatically fixes the suggestions for \[[playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2024&gist=7e2030163b11ee96d17adc3325b01780)\]: * `if Ty::<i32> { f: K }.m() {}`: `if Ty::<i32> { SomeStruct { f: K } }.m() {}` (broken) → ` if (Ty::<i32> { f: K }).m() {}` * `if <T as Trait>::Out { f: K::<> }.m() {}`: `if <T as Trait>(::Out { f: K::<> }).m() {}` (broken) → `if (<T as Trait>::Out { f: K::<> }).m() {}` 4. Merge and simplify UI tests pertaining to this issue, so it's easier to add more regression tests like for the two cases mentioned above. 5. Merge UI tests and add the two regression tests. Best reviewed commit by commit (on request I'll partially squash after approval).
2025-03-25compiletest: Support matching on diagnostics without a spanVadim Petrochenkov-0/+5
2025-03-25Incorporate issue-111692.rs into the larger test file and add more test casesLeón Orell Valerian Liehr-83/+66
Note that issue-111692.rs was incorrectly named: It's a regression test for issue [#]112278, not for [#]111692. That's been addressed, too.
2025-03-25Combine several test files into oneLeón Orell Valerian Liehr-372/+263
This makes it a lot easier to add smaller regression tests related to "incorrectly placed" struct literals.
2025-03-25Brace-ident-colon can certainly no longer start a blockLeón Orell Valerian Liehr-49/+86
thanks to the removal of type ascription.
2025-03-21cleaned and organized 3 tests in `./tests/ui/issues`Spencer-0/+28
2025-03-21remove `feature(inline_const_pat)`lcnr-180/+0
2025-03-20Make dedicated recovery for missing braces on closure with returnMichael Goulet-6/+12