This allows you to enable *all* nested visits in a future-compatible
sort of way. Moreover, if you choose to override the `visit_nested`
methods yourself, you can "future-proof" against omissions by overriding
`nested_visit_map` to panic.
Stabilize `..` in tuple (struct) patterns
I'd like to nominate `..` in tuple and tuple struct patterns for stabilization.
This feature is a relatively small extension to existing stable functionality and doesn't have known blockers.
The feature first appeared in Rust 1.10 6 months ago.
An example of use: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/36203
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33627
r? @nikomatsakis
Implement the `!` type
This implements the never type (`!`) and hides it behind the feature gate `#[feature(never_type)]`. With the feature gate off, things should build as normal (although some error messages may be different). With the gate on, `!` is usable as a type and diverging type variables (ie. types that are unconstrained by anything in the code) will default to `!` instead of `()`.
Implementation of #34168
r? @brson
cc @alexcrichton
cc @steveklabnik
cc @jonathandturner
I only updated `librustc_privacy/diagnostics.rs`, and I already found a case where the code doesn't throw the expected error code (E0448).
Fixes#34168.
Add AST validation pass and move some checks to it
The purpose of this pass is to catch constructions that fit into AST data structures, but not permitted by the language. As an example, `impl`s don't have visibilities, but for convenience and uniformity with other items they are represented with a structure `Item` which has `Visibility` field.
This pass is intended to run after expansion of macros and syntax extensions (and before lowering to HIR), so it can catch erroneous constructions that were generated by them. This pass allows to remove ad hoc semantic checks from the parser, which can be overruled by syntax extensions and occasionally macros.
The checks can be put here if they are simple, local, don't require results of any complex analysis like name resolution or type checking and maybe don't logically fall into other passes. I expect most of errors generated by this pass to be non-fatal and allowing the compilation to proceed.
I intend to move some more checks to this pass later and maybe extend it with new checks, like, for example, identifier validity. Given that syntax extensions are going to be stabilized in the measurable future, it's important that they would not be able to subvert usual language rules.
In this patch I've added two new checks - a check for labels named `'static` and a check for lifetimes and labels named `'_`. The first one gives a hard error, the second one - a future compatibility warning.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33059 ([breaking-change])
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1177
r? @nrc
