Regression test `println!()` panic message on `ErrorKind::BrokenPipe`
No existing test (that I could find) failed if the `panic!()` of the `println!()` family of functions was removed, or if its message was changed:
104f4300cf/library/std/src/io/stdio.rs (L1007-L1009)
So add such a test.
This is in preparation of adding a hint about the existence of [`unix_sigpipe`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97889) if that is the reason for the panic.
Even if we don't end up adding a hint, this is still a sensible test to have, I think.
`@rustbot` label +A-testsuite +A-io +T-libs +O-unix
Revert "add tidy check that forbids issue ui test filenames"
This reverts commit 13e2abf6b3.
Reverting because an MCP was requested and it turned out there was a lack of a consensus on what to do in this area.
tests/ui/hello_world/main.rs: Remove FIXME (#62277)
The purpose of the test is to make sure that compiling hello world produces no compiler output. To properly test that, we need to run the entire compiler pipeline. We don't want the test to pass if codegen accidentally starts writing to stdout. So keep it as build-pass.
Part of #62277
Build the first LLVM without LTO in try builds
Currently, we perform three LLVM builds in the Linux x64 dist builder, which is used for `try` builds:
1) "Normal" LLVM - takes ~5s to compile thanks to `sccache`, but ~8 minutes to link because of ThinLTO
2) PGO instrumented LLVM - same timings as 1)
3) PGO optimized LLVM - takes about 20 minutes to build
When I tried to disable LTO for build 1), it suddenly takes only about a minute to build, because the linking step is much faster. The first LLVM doesn't really need LTO all that much. Without it, it will be a bit slower to build `rustc` in two subsequent steps, but it seems that the ~7 minutes saved on linking it do win that back.
Btw, we can't use the host LLVM for build 1), because this LLVM then builds `rustc` in PGO instrumented mode, and we need the same compiler when later PGO optimizing `rustc`. And we want to use our in-house LLVM for that I think.
[rustdoc] If re-export is private, get the next item until a public one is found or expose the private item directly
Fixes#81141.
If we have:
```rust
use Private as Something;
pub fn foo() -> Something {}
```
Then `Something` will be replaced by `Private`.
r? `@notriddle`
Turns out opaque types can have hidden types registered during mir validation
See the newly added test's documentation for an explanation.
fixes#114121
Restore region uniquification in the new solver 🎉
All of the bugs that were "due" to uniquification have been settled via other means (e.g. bidirectional alias-relate, param-env incompleteness, etc).
Firstly, revert the functional changes in #110180. 😸
Secondly, we need to ignore regions when considering if a goal has changed (the "has_changed" boolean returned from `evaluate_goal`) -- otherwise, because we're doing region uniquification, we may perpetually consider a goal to be changed. See the UI test I committed for an explanation.
docs: fmt::Debug*: Fix comments for finish method.
In the code sample for the `finish` method on `DebugList`, `DebugMap`, and `DebugSet`, refer to finishing the list, map, or set, rather than struct as it did.
rustdoc: fix cross-crate `impl Sized` & `impl ?Sized`
Previously, cross-crate impl-Trait (APIT, RPIT, etc.) that only consists of a single `Sized` bound (modulo outlives-bounds) and ones that are `?Sized` were incorrectly rendered. To give you a taste (before vs. after):
```diff
- fn sized(x: impl ) -> impl
+ fn sized(x: impl Sized) -> impl Sized
- fn sized_outlives<'a>(x: impl 'a) -> impl 'a
+ fn sized_outlives<'a>(x: impl Sized + 'a) -> impl Sized + 'a
- fn maybe_sized(x: &impl ) -> &impl
+ fn maybe_sized(x: &impl ?Sized) -> &impl ?Sized
- fn debug_maybe_sized(x: &impl Debug) -> &impl ?Sized + Debug
+ fn debug_maybe_sized(x: &(impl Debug + ?Sized)) -> &(impl Debug + ?Sized)
```
Moreover, we now surround impl-Trait that has multiple bounds with parentheses if they're the pointee of a reference or raw pointer type. This affects both local and cross-crate docs. The current output isn't correct (rustc would emit the error *ambiguous `+` in a type* if we fed the rendered code back to it).
---
Best reviewed commit by commit :)
`@rustbot` label A-cross-crate-reexports
Implement diagnostic translation for rustc-errors
This is my first PR to rustc yeah~
I'm going to implement diagnostic translation on rustc-errors crate.
This PR is WIP, the reason of opening this as draft, I want to show my code to prevent the issue caused by misunderstanding and also I have few questions.
Some error messages are processed by `pluralize!` macro which determines to use plural word or not. From now, I make two kinds of keys and combine with enum but I'm not sure is this best method to do it.
Is there any prefered method to do this? => This resolved on conversation on PR.
I'll remain to perform force-push until my first implementation looks good to me
proc-macros are processed early in the compiler pipeline. There is no
need to involve codegen. So change to check-pass.
I have also looked through each changed test and to me it is
sufficiently clear that codegen is not needed for the purpose of the
test.
I skipped changing tests/ui/proc-macro/no-missing-docs.rs in this commit
because it was not clear to me that it can be changed to check-pass.
The purpose of the test is to make sure that compiling hello world
produces no compiler output. To properly test that, we need to run the
entire compiler pipeline. We don't want the test to pass if codegen
accidentally starts writing to stdout. So keep it as build-pass.
Don't treat negative trait predicates as always knowable
We don't need this. It was added in #90104 but I don't really know why. It's not sound afaict -- negative trait predicates need the same coherence-ambiguity/orphan check rules as positive ones.
r? `@lcnr`
cc `@spastorino,` do you remember why?
