Enable Vec's calloc optimization for Option<NonZero>
Someone on discord noticed that `vec![None::<NonZeroU32>; N]` wasn't getting the optimization, so here's a PR 🙃
We can certainly do this in the standard library because we know for sure this is ok, but I think it's also a necessary consequence of documented guarantees like those in https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/option/#representation and https://doc.rust-lang.org/core/num/struct.NonZeroU32.html
It feels weird to do this without adding a test, but I wasn't sure where that would belong. Is it worth adding codegen tests for these?
libunwind fix and cleanup
Fix:
1. "system-llvm-libunwind" now only skip build-script for linux target
2. workaround from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/65972 is not needed, upstream fix it in 68c50708d1 ( LLVM 11 )
3. remove code for MSCV and Apple in `compile()`, as they are not used
4. fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69222 , compile c files and cpp files in different config
5. fix conditional compilation for musl target.
6. fix that x86_64-fortanix-unknown-sgx don't link libunwind built in build-script into rlib
Add inline attr to CString::into_inner so it can optimize out NonNull checks
It seems that currently if you convert any of the standard library's container to a pointer and then to a NonNull pointer, all will optimize out the NULL check except `CString`(https://godbolt.org/z/YPKW9G5xn),
because for some reason `CString::into_inner` isn't inlined even though it's a private function that should compile into a simple `mov` instruction.
Adding a simple `#[inline]` attribute solves this, code example:
```rust
use std::ffi::CString;
use std::ptr::NonNull;
pub fn cstring_nonull(mut n: CString) -> NonNull<i8> {
NonNull::new(CString::into_raw(n)).unwrap()
}
```
assembly before:
```asm
__ZN3wat14cstring_nonull17h371c755bcad76294E:
.cfi_startproc
pushq %rbp
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
movq %rsp, %rbp
.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
callq __ZN3std3ffi5c_str7CString10into_inner17h28ece07b276e2878E
testq %rax, %rax
je LBB0_2
popq %rbp
retq
LBB0_2:
leaq l___unnamed_1(%rip), %rdi
leaq l___unnamed_2(%rip), %rdx
movl $43, %esi
callq __ZN4core9panicking5panic17h92a83fa9085a8f73E
.cfi_endproc
.section __TEXT,__const
l___unnamed_1:
.ascii "called `Option::unwrap()` on a `None` value"
l___unnamed_3:
.ascii "wat.rs"
.section __DATA,__const
.p2align 3
l___unnamed_2:
.quad l___unnamed_3
.asciz "\006\000\000\000\000\000\000\000\006\000\000\000(\000\000"
```
Assembly after:
```asm
__ZN3wat14cstring_nonull17h9645eb9341fb25d7E:
.cfi_startproc
pushq %rbp
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
movq %rsp, %rbp
.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
movq %rdi, %rax
popq %rbp
retq
.cfi_endproc
```
(Related discussion on zulip: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/219381-t-libs/topic/NonNull.20From.3CBox.3CT.3E.3E)
Remove Iterator #[rustc_on_unimplemented]s that no longer apply.
Now that `IntoIterator` is implemented for arrays, all the `rustc_on_unimplemented` for arrays of ranges (e.g. `for _ in [1..3] {}`) no longer apply, since they are now valid Rust.
Separated these from #85670, because we should discuss a potential new (clippy?) lint for these.
Until Rust 1.52, `for _ in [1..3] {}` produced:
```
error[E0277]: `[std::ops::Range<{integer}>; 1]` is not an iterator
--> src/main.rs:2:14
|
2 | for _ in [1..3] {}
| ^^^^^^ if you meant to iterate between two values, remove the square brackets
|
= help: the trait `std::iter::Iterator` is not implemented for `[std::ops::Range<{integer}>; 1]`
= note: `[start..end]` is an array of one `Range`; you might have meant to have a `Range` without the brackets: `start..end`
= note: required by `std::iter::IntoIterator::into_iter`
```
But in Rust 1.53 and later, it compiles fine. It iterates over the array by value, for one iteration with the element `1..3`.
This is probably a mistake, which is no longer caught. Should we have a lint for it? Should Clippy have a lint for it?
cc ```@estebank``` ```@flip1995```
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84513
Update cc
Recent commits have improved `cc`'s finding of MSVC tools on Windows. In particular it should help to address these issues: #83043 and #43468
readd capture disjoint fields gate
This readds a feature gate guard that was added in PR #83521. (Basically, there were unintended consequences to the code exposed by removing the feature gate guard.)
The root bug still remains to be resolved, as discussed in issue #85561. This is just a band-aid suitable for a beta backport.
Cc issue #85435
Note that the latter issue is unfixed until we backport this (or another fix) to 1.53 beta
stabilize member constraints
Stabilizes the use of "member constraints" in solving `impl Trait` bindings. This is a step towards stabilizing a "MVP" of "named impl Trait".
# Member constraint stabilization report
| Info | |
| --- | --- |
| Tracking issue | [rust-lang/rust#61997](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61997) |
| Implementation history | [rust-lang/rust#61775] |
| rustc-dev-guide coverage | [link](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/borrow_check/region_inference/member_constraints.html) |
| Complications | [rust-lang/rust#61773] |
[rust-lang/rust#61775]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/61775
[rust-lang/rust#61773]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61773
## Background
Member constraints are an extension to our region solver that was introduced to make async fn region solving tractable. There are used in situations like the following:
```rust
fn foo<'a, 'b>(...) -> impl Trait<'a, 'b> { .. }
```
The problem here is that every region R in the hidden type must be equal to *either* `'a` *or* `'b` (or `'static`). This cannot be expressed simply via 'outlives constriants' like `R: 'a`. Therefore, we introduce a 'member constraint' `R member of ['a, 'b]`.
These constraints were introduced in [rust-lang/rust#61775]. At the time, we kept them feature gated and used them only for `impl Trait` return types that are derived from `async fn`. The intention, however, was always to support them in other contexts once we had time to gain more experience with them.
**In the time since their introduction, we have encountered no surprises or bugs due to these member constraints.** They are tested extensively as part of every async function that involves multiple unrelated lifetimes in its arguments.
## Tests
The behavior of member constraints is covered by the following tests:
* [`src/test/ui/async-await/multiple-lifetimes`](20e032e650/src/test/ui/async-await/multiple-lifetimes) -- tests using the async await, which are mostly already stabilized
* [`src/test/ui/impl-trait/multiple-lifetimes.rs`](20e032e650/src/test/ui/impl-trait/multiple-lifetimes.rs)
* [`src/test/ui/impl-trait/multiple-lifetimes/ordinary-bounds-unsuited.rs`](20e032e650/src/test/ui/impl-trait/multiple-lifetimes/ordinary-bounds-unsuited.rs)
* [`src/test/ui/async-await/multiple-lifetimes/ret-impl-trait-fg.rs`](20e032e650/src/test/ui/async-await/multiple-lifetimes/ret-impl-trait-fg.rs)
* [`src/test/ui/async-await/multiple-lifetimes/ret-impl-trait-one.rs`](20e032e650/src/test/ui/async-await/multiple-lifetimes/ret-impl-trait-one.rs)
These tests cover a number of scenarios:
* `-> implTrait<'a, 'b>` with unrelated lifetimes `'a` and `'b`, as described above
* `async fn` that returns an `impl Trait` like the previous case, which desugars to a kind of "nested" impl trait like `impl Future<Output = impl Trait<'a, 'b>>`
## Potential concerns
There is a potential interaction with `impl Trait` on local variables, described in [rust-lang/rust#61773]. The challenge is that if you have a program like:
```rust=
trait Foo<'_> { }
impl Foo<'_> for &u32 { }
fn bar() {
let x: impl Foo<'_> = &44; // let's call the region variable for `'_` `'1`
}
```
then we would wind up with `'0 member of ['1, 'static]`, where `'0` is the region variable in the hidden type (`&'0 u32`) and `'1` is the region variable in the bounds `Foo<'1>`. This is tricky because both `'0` and `'1` are being inferred -- so making them equal may have other repercussions.
That said, `impl Trait` in bindings are not stable, and the implementation is pretty far from stabilization. Moreover, the difficulty highlighted here is not due to the presence of member constraints -- it's inherent to the design of the language. In other words, stabilizing member constraints does not actually cause us to accept anything that would make this problem any harder.
So I don't see this as a blocker to stabilization of member constraints; it is potentially a blocker to stablization of `impl trait` in let bindings.
E0599 suggestions and elision of generic argument if no canditate is found
fixes#81576
changes: In error E0599 (method not found) generic argument are eluded if the method was not found anywhere. If the method was found in another inherent implementation suggest that it was found elsewhere.
Example
```rust
struct Wrapper<T>(T);
struct Wrapper2<T> {
x: T,
}
impl Wrapper2<i8> {
fn method(&self) {}
}
fn main() {
let wrapper = Wrapper(i32);
wrapper.method();
let wrapper2 = Wrapper2{x: i32};
wrapper2.method();
}
```
```
Error[E0599]: no method named `method` found for struct `Wrapper<_>` in the current scope
....
error[E0599]: no method named `method` found for struct `Wrapper2<i32>` in the current scope
...
= note: The method was found for Wrapper2<i8>.
```
I am not very happy with the ```no method named `test` found for struct `Vec<_, _>` in the current scope```. I think it might be better to show only one generic argument `Vec<_>` if there is a default one. But I haven't yet found a way to do that,
Optimize linkchecker and add report.
This makes three changes to the linkchecker:
* Adds a report displayed after it finishes.
* Improves the performance by caching all filesystem access. The linkchecker can take over a minute to run on some systems, and this should make it about 2-3 times faster.
* Added a few tests.
While stdlib implementations of the unchecked methods require unchecked
math, there is no reason to gate it behind this for external users. The
reasoning for a separate `step_trait_ext` feature is unclear, and as
such has been merged as well.
Add `TrustedRandomAccess` specialization for `Vec::extend()`
This should do roughly the same as the `TrustedLen` specialization but result in less IR by using `__iterator_get_unchecked`
instead of `Iterator::for_each`
Conflicting specializations are manually prioritized by grouping them under yet another helper trait.
Fix typo in core::array::IntoIter comment
Saw a small typo reading some internal comments and decided to just throw this up to fix it for future readers.
Remove num_as_ne_bytes feature
From the discussion in #76976, it is determined that eventual results of the safe transmute work as a more general mechanism will let these conversions happen in safe code without needing specialized methods.
Merging this PR closes#76976 and resolves#64464. Several T-libs members have raised their opinion that it doesn't pull its weight as a standalone method, and so we should not track it as a specific thing to add.
fix `matches!` and `assert_matches!` on edition 2021
Previously this code failed to compile on edition 2021. [(Playground)](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=53960f2f051f641777b9e458da747707)
```rust
fn main() {
matches!((), ());
}
```
```
Compiling playground v0.0.1 (/playground)
error: `$pattern:pat` may be followed by `|`, which is not allowed for `pat` fragments
|
= note: allowed there are: `=>`, `,`, `=`, `if` or `in`
error: aborting due to previous error
error: could not compile `playground`
To learn more, run the command again with --verbose.
```
Post-monomorphization errors traces MVP
This PR works towards better diagnostics for the errors encountered in #85155 and similar.
We can encounter post-monomorphization errors (PMEs) when collecting mono items. The current diagnostics are confusing for these cases when they happen in a dependency (but are acceptable when they happen in the local crate).
These kinds of errors will be more likely now that `stdarch` uses const generics for its intrinsics' immediate arguments, and validates these const arguments with a mechanism that triggers such PMEs.
(Not to mention that the errors happen during codegen, so only when building code that actually uses these code paths. Check builds don't trigger them, neither does unused code)
So in this PR, we detect these kinds of errors during the mono item graph walk: if any error happens while collecting a node or its neighbors, we print a diagnostic about the current collection step, so that the user has at least some context of which erroneous code and dependency triggered the error.
The diagnostics for issue #85155 now have this note showing the source of the erroneous const argument:
```
note: the above error was encountered while instantiating `fn std::arch::x86_64::_mm_blend_ps::<51_i32>`
--> issue-85155.rs:11:24
|
11 | let _blended = _mm_blend_ps(a, b, 0x33);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: aborting due to previous error
```
Note that #85155 is a reduced version of a case happening in the wild, to indirect users of the `rustfft` crate, as seen in https://github.com/ejmahler/RustFFT/issues/74. The crate had a few of these out-of-range immediates. Here's how the diagnostics in this PR would have looked on one of its examples before it was fixed:
<details>
```
error[E0080]: evaluation of constant value failed
--> ./stdarch/crates/core_arch/src/macros.rs:8:9
|
8 | assert!(IMM >= MIN && IMM <= MAX, "IMM value not in expected range");
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the evaluated program panicked at 'IMM value not in expected range', ./stdarch/crates/core_arch/src/macros.rs:8:9
|
= note: this error originates in the macro `$crate::panic::panic_2015` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
note: the above error was encountered while instantiating `fn _mm_blend_ps::<51_i32>`
--> /tmp/RustFFT/src/avx/avx_vector.rs:1314:23
|
1314 | let blended = _mm_blend_ps(rows[0], rows[2], 0x33);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: the above error was encountered while instantiating `fn _mm_permute_pd::<5_i32>`
--> /tmp/RustFFT/src/avx/avx_vector.rs:1859:9
|
1859 | _mm_permute_pd(self, 0x05)
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: the above error was encountered while instantiating `fn _mm_permute_pd::<15_i32>`
--> /tmp/RustFFT/src/avx/avx_vector.rs:1863:32
|
1863 | (_mm_movedup_pd(self), _mm_permute_pd(self, 0x0F))
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0080`.
error: could not compile `rustfft`
To learn more, run the command again with --verbose.
```
</details>
I've developed and discussed this with them, so maybe r? `@oli-obk` -- but feel free to redirect to someone else of course.
(I'm not sure we can say that this PR definitely closes issue 85155, as it's still unclear exactly which diagnostics and information would be interesting to report in such cases -- and we've discussed printing backtraces before. I have prototypes of some complete and therefore noisy backtraces I showed Oli, but we decided to not include them in this PR for now)
