There are at least a couple (and plausibly even three) diagnostics that
could use the spans of visibility modifiers in order to be reliably
correct (rather than hacking and munging surrounding spans to try to
infer where the visibility keyword must have been).
We follow the naming convention established by the other `Spanned` HIR
nodes: the "outer" type alias gets the "prime" node-type name, the
"inner" enum gets the name suffixed with an underscore, and the variant
names are prefixed with the prime name and `pub use` exported from here
(from HIR).
Thanks to veteran reviewer Vadim Petrochenkov for suggesting this
uniform approach. (A previous draft, based on the reasoning that
`Visibility::Inherited` should not have a span, tried to hack in a named
`span` field on `Visibility::Restricted` and a positional field on
`Public` and `Crate`. This was ... not so uniform.)
Visibility spans were added to the AST in #47799 (d6bdf296) as a
`Spanned<_>`—which means that we need to choose a span even in the case
of inherited visibility (what you get when there's no `pub` &c. keyword
at all). That initial implementation's choice is pretty
counterintuitive, which could matter if we want to use it as a site to
suggest inserting a visibility modifier, &c.
(The phrase "Schelling span" in the comment is meant in analogy to the
game-theoretic concept of a "Schelling point", a value that is chosen
simply because it's what one can expect to agree upon with other agents
in the absence of explicit coördination.)
Avoid needless allocations in `liveness_of_locals`.
We don't need to replace the heap-allocated bitset, we can just
overwrite its contents.
This speeds up most NLL benchmarks, the best by 1.5%.
r? @nikomatsakis
Previously Cargo would hardlink all the dependencies into the "root" as
foo.dll and the `toplevel` array would get populated with these, but
that's no longer the case. Instead, cargo will only do this for the
final artifacts/final libraries.
Rustbuild is updated to continue looping through the artifacts mentioned
instead of early-returning. This should fix the bug.
@alexcrichton found the cause of this and suggested this fix.
Do not allow LLVM to increase a TLS's alignment on macOS.
This addresses the various TLS segfault on macOS 10.10.
Fix#51794.
Fix#51758.
Fix#50867.
Fix#48866.
Fix#46355.
Fix#44056.
Most of the time, it's not a problem that the types of the arm bodies in
a desugared-from-`?` match are different (that is, specifically: in `x?`
where x is a `Result<A, B>`, the `Ok` arm body is an `A`, whereas the
`Err` arm diverges to return a `Result<A, B>`), because they're being
assigned to different places. But in tail position, the types do need to
match, and our error message was explicitly referring to "match arms",
which is confusing when there's no `match` in the sweetly sugared
source.
It is not without some misgivings that we pollute the clarity-of-purpose
of `note_error_origin` with the suggestion to wrap with `Ok` (the other
branches are pointing out the odd-arm-out in the HIR that is the origin
of the error; the new branch that issues the `Ok` suggestion is serving
a different purpose), but it's the natural place to do it given that
we're already matching on `ObligationCauseCode::MatchExpressionArm {
arm_span, source }` there.
Resolves#51632.
Implement PartialEq between &str and OsString
This fixes#49854.
It allows equality comparison between `OsString` values and `str` references, such as `os_string == "something"`.
to not shadow the system installed LLD when linking with LLD.
Before:
- `-C linker=lld -Z linker-flavor=ld.lld` uses rustc's LLD
- It's not possible to use a system installed LLD that's named `lld`
With this commit:
- `-C linker=rust-lld -Z linker-flavor=ld.lld` uses rustc's LLD
- `-C linker=lld -Z linker-flavor=ld.lld` uses the system installed LLD
