"Fix" an overflow in byte position math
r? `@estebank`
help! I fixed the ICE only to brick the diagnostic.
I mean, it was wrong previously (using an already expanded macro span), but it is really bad now XD
Rollup of 12 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #88795 (Print a note if a character literal contains a variation selector)
- #89015 (core::ascii::escape_default: reduce struct size)
- #89078 (Cleanup: Remove needless reference in ParentHirIterator)
- #89086 (Stabilize `Iterator::map_while`)
- #89096 ([bootstrap] Improve the error message when `ninja` is not found to link to installation instructions)
- #89113 (dont `.ensure()` the `thir_abstract_const` query call in `mir_build`)
- #89114 (Fixes a technicality regarding the size of C's `char` type)
- #89115 (⬆️ rust-analyzer)
- #89126 (Fix ICE when `indirect_structural_match` is allowed)
- #89141 (Impl `Error` for `FromSecsError` without foreign type)
- #89142 (Fix match for placeholder region)
- #89147 (add case for checking const refs in check_const_value_eq)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Migrate in-tree crates to 2021
This replaces #89075 (cherry picking some of the commits from there), and closes#88637 and fixes#89074.
It excludes a migration of the library crates for now (see tidy diff) because we have some pending bugs around macro spans to fix there.
I instrumented bootstrap during the migration to make sure all crates moved from 2018 to 2021 had the compatibility warnings applied first.
Originally, the intent was to support cargo fix --edition within bootstrap, but this proved fairly difficult to pull off. We'd need to architect the check functionality to support running cargo check and cargo fix within the same x.py invocation, and only resetting sysroots on check. Further, it was found that cargo fix doesn't behave too well with "not quite workspaces", such as Clippy which has several crates. Bootstrap runs with --manifest-path ... for all the tools, and this makes cargo fix only attempt migration for that crate. We can't use e.g. --workspace due to needing to maintain sysroots for different phases of compilation appropriately.
It is recommended to skip the mass migration of Cargo.toml's to 2021 for review purposes; you can also use `git diff d6cd2c6c87 -I'^edition = .20...$'` to ignore the edition = 2018/21 lines in the diff.
Newcomers may write `{1, 2, 3}` for making arrays, and the current error
message is not informative enough to quickly convince them what is
needed to fix the error.
This PR implements a diagnostic for this case, and its output looks like
this:
```text
error: this code is interpreted as a block expression, not an array
--> src/lib.rs:1:22
|
1 | const FOO: [u8; 3] = {
| ______________________^
2 | | 1, 2, 3
3 | | };
| |_^
|
= note: to define an array, one would use square brackets instead of curly braces
help: try using [] instead of {}
|
1 | const FOO: [u8; 3] = [
2 | 1, 2, 3
3 | ];
|
```
Fix#87672
Recover from `Foo(a: 1, b: 2)`
Detect likely `struct` literal using parentheses as delimiters and emit
targeted suggestion instead of type ascription parse error.
Fix#61326.
Revert anon union parsing
Revert PR #84571 and #85515, which implemented anonymous union parsing in a manner that broke the context-sensitivity for the `union` keyword and thus broke stable Rust code.
Fix#88583.
Accept `m!{ .. }.method()` and `m!{ .. }?` statements.
This PR fixes something that I keep running into when using `quote!{}.into()` in a proc macro to convert the `proc_macro2::TokenStream` to a `proc_macro::TokenStream`:
Before:
```
error: expected expression, found `.`
--> src/lib.rs:6:6
|
4 | quote! {
5 | ...
6 | }.into()
| ^ expected expression
```
After:
```
```
(No output, compiles fine.)
---
Context:
For expressions like `{ 1 }` and `if true { 1 } else { 2 }`, we accept them as full statements without a trailing `;`, which means the following is not accepted:
```rust
{ 1 } - 1 // error
```
since that is parsed as two statements: `{ 1 }` and `-1`. Syntactically correct, but the type of `{ 1 }` should be `()` as there is no `;`.
However, for specifically `.` and `?` after the `}`, we do [continue parsing it as an expression](13db8440bb/compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/expr.rs (L864-L876)):
```rust
{ "abc" }.len(); // ok
```
For braced macro invocations, we do not do this:
```rust
vec![1, 2, 3].len(); // ok
vec!{1, 2, 3}.len(); // error
```
(It parses `vec!{1, 2, 3}` as a full statement, and then complains about `.len()` not being a valid expression.)
This PR changes this to also look for a `.` and `?` after a braced macro invocation. We can be sure the macro is an expression and not a full statement in those cases, since no statement can start with a `.` or `?`.
Use smaller spans for some structured suggestions
Use more accurate suggestion spans for
* argument parse error
* fully qualified path
* missing code block type
* numeric casts
Encode spans relative to the enclosing item
The aim of this PR is to avoid recomputing queries when code is moved without modification.
MCP at https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/443
This is achieved by :
1. storing the HIR owner LocalDefId information inside the span;
2. encoding and decoding spans relative to the enclosing item in the incremental on-disk cache;
3. marking a dependency to the `source_span(LocalDefId)` query when we translate a span from the short (`Span`) representation to its explicit (`SpanData`) representation.
Since all client code uses `Span`, step 3 ensures that all manipulations
of span byte positions actually create the dependency edge between
the caller and the `source_span(LocalDefId)`.
This query return the actual absolute span of the parent item.
As a consequence, any source code motion that changes the absolute byte position of a node will either:
- modify the distance to the parent's beginning, so change the relative span's hash;
- dirty `source_span`, and trigger the incremental recomputation of all code that
depends on the span's absolute byte position.
With this scheme, I believe the dependency tracking to be accurate.
For the moment, the spans are marked during lowering.
I'd rather do this during def-collection,
but the AST MutVisitor is not practical enough just yet.
The only difference is that we attach macro-expanded spans
to their expansion point instead of the macro itself.
Change more x64 size checks to not apply to x32.
Commit 95e096d6 changed a bunch of size checks already, but more have
been added, so this fixes the new ones the same way: the various size
checks that are conditional on target_arch = "x86_64" were not intended
to apply to x86_64-unknown-linux-gnux32, so add
target_pointer_width = "64" to the conditions.
This commit focuses on emitting clean errors for the following syntax
error:
```
Some(42).map(|a|
dbg!(a);
a
);
```
Previous implementation tried to recover after parsing the closure body
(the `dbg` expression) by replacing the next `;` with a `,`, which made
the next expression belong to the next function argument. As such, the
following errors were emitted (among others):
- the semicolon token was not expected,
- a is not in scope,
- Option::map is supposed to take one argument, not two.
This commit allows us to gracefully handle this situation by adding
giving the parser the ability to remember when it has just parsed a
closure body inside a function call. When this happens, we can treat the
unexpected `;` specifically and try to parse as much statements as
possible in order to eat the whole block. When we can't parse statements
anymore, we generate a clean error indicating that the braces are
missing, and return an ExprKind::Err.
This reverts commit 059b68dd67.
Note that this was manually adjusted to retain some of the refactoring
introduced by commit 059b68dd67, so that it could
likewise retain the correction introduced in commit
5b4bc05fa5
Improve diagnostics for unary plus operators (#88276)
This pull request improves the diagnostics emitted on parsing a unary plus operator. See #88276.
Before:
```
error: expected expression, found `+`
--> src/main.rs:2:13
|
2 | let x = +1;
| ^ expected expression
```
After:
```
error: leading `+` is not supported
--> main.rs:2:13
|
2 | let x = +1;
| ^
| |
| unexpected `+`
| help: try removing the `+`
```
Commit 95e096d6 changed a bunch of size checks already, but more have
been added, so this fixes the new ones the same way: the various size
checks that are conditional on target_arch = "x86_64" were not intended
to apply to x86_64-unknown-linux-gnux32, so add
target_pointer_width = "64" to the conditions.
Detect bare blocks with type ascription that were meant to be a `struct` literal
Address part of #34255.
Potential improvement: silence the other knock down errors in `issue-34255-1.rs`.
