Create elided lifetime parameters for function-like types
Split from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97720
This PR refactor lifetime generic parameters in bare function types and parenthesized traits to introduce the additional required lifetimes as fresh parameters in a `for<>` bound.
This PR does the same to lifetimes appearing in closure signatures, and as-if introducing `for<>` bounds on closures (without the associated change in semantics).
r? `@petrochenkov`
Document unstable `--extern` options
These are needed for Cargo's `build-std` feature and for anyone who wanted to do a similar thing outside of Cargo.
Point at return expression for RPIT-related error
Certainly this needs some diagnostic refining, but I wanted to show that it was possible first and foremost. Not sure if this is the right approach. Open to feedback.
Fixes#80583
clarify how Rust atomics correspond to C++ atomics
``@cbeuw`` noted in https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/pull/1963 that the correspondence between C++ atomics and Rust atomics is not quite as obvious as one might think, since in Rust I can use `get_mut` to treat previously non-atomic data as atomic. However, I think using C++20 `atomic_ref`, we can establish a suitable relation between the two -- or do you see problems with that ``@cbeuw?`` (I recall you said there was some issue, but it was deep inside that PR and Github makes it impossible to find...)
Cc ``@thomcc;`` not sure whom else to ping for atomic memory model things.
update CPU usage script
I've made slight changes to the CPU usage plot script with updated links from the [ci2 aws instance](https://rust-lang-ci2.s3.amazonaws.com/).
This duplicates a lot of checking, and doesn't seem particularly useful -
these are already caught in review.
Note that this still keeps the license check.
This is difficult to support without submodule handling in bootstrap.py, because cargo will refuse
to vendor sources unless it knows the Cargo.toml files of all tools in tree. Moving vendor support
to rustbuild means that rustbuild will be built without vendoring.
Rather than trying to solve this, just remove support altogether and require
people to use `rustc-src` if they want vendoring (or run `cargo vendor` manually).
use `def_ident_span` , `body_owner_def_id` instead of `in_progress_typeck_results`, `guess_head_span`
use `body_id.owner` directly
add description to label
These submodules were previously updated in python because Cargo gives a hard error if toml files
are missing from the workspace:
```
error: failed to load manifest for workspace member `/home/jnelson/rust-lang/rust/src/tools/rls`
Caused by:
failed to read `/home/jnelson/rust-lang/rust/src/tools/rls/Cargo.toml`
Caused by:
No such file or directory (os error 2)
failed to run: /home/jnelson/rust-lang/rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage0/bin/cargo build --manifest-path /home/jnelson/rust-lang/rust/src/bootstrap/Cargo.toml
```
However, bootstrap doesn't actually need to be part of the workspace.
Remove it so we can move submodule handling fully to Rust, avoiding duplicate code between Rust and Python.
Note that this does break `cargo run`; it has to be `cd src/bootstrap && cargo run` now.
Given that we're planning to make the main entrypoint a shell script (or rust binary),
I think this is a good tradeoff for reduced complexity in bootstrap.py.
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #97867 (lub: don't bail out due to empty binders)
- #98099 (interpret: convert_tag_add_extra: allow tagger to raise errors)
- #98199 (Move some tests to more reasonable directories)
- #98334 (Add a full regression test for #73727)
- #98336 (Remove the unused-`#[doc(hidden)]` logic from the `unused_attributes` lint)
- #98344 (This comment is out dated and misleading, the arm is about TAITs)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
This comment is out dated and misleading, the arm is about TAITs
r? ```@oli-obk```
```@oli-obk``` unsure if you want to add a different comment of some sort.
```@bors``` rollup=always
Remove the unused-`#[doc(hidden)]` logic from the `unused_attributes` lint
Fixes#96890.
It was found out that `#[doc(hidden)]` on trait impl items does indeed have an effect on the generated documentation (see the linked issue). In my opinion and the one of [others](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/266220-rustdoc/topic/Validy.20checks.20for.20.60.23.5Bdoc.28hidden.29.5D.60/near/281846219), rustdoc's output is actually a bit flawed in that regard but that should be tracked in a new issue I suppose (I will open an issue for that in the near future).
The check was introduced in #96008 which is marked to be part of version `1.62` (current `beta`). As far as I understand, this means that **this PR needs to be backported** to `beta` to fix#96890 on time. Correct me if I am wrong.
CC `@dtolnay` (in case you would like to agree or disagree with my decision to fully remove this check)
`@rustbot` label A-lint T-compiler T-rustdoc
r? `@rust-lang/compiler`
Add a full regression test for #73727Closes#73727
This also moves a test to the `issues` directory as it's also tested on the adt_const_params feature.
r? ```@compiler-errors```
Signed-off-by: Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
lub: don't bail out due to empty binders
allows for the following to compile. The equivalent code using `struct Wrapper<'upper>(fn(&'upper ());` already compiles on stable.
```rust
let _: fn(&'upper ()) = match v {
true => lt_in_fn::<'a>(),
false => lt_in_fn::<'b>(),
};
```
see https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=7034a677190110941223cafac6632f70 for a complete example
r? ```@rust-lang/types```
#91318 introduced a trait for infallible folders distinct from the fallible version. For some reason (completely unfathomable to me now that I look at it with fresh eyes), the infallible trait was a supertrait of the fallible one: that is, all fallible folders were required to also be infallible. Moreover the `Error` associated type was defined on the infallible trait! It's so absurd that it has me questioning whether I was entirely sane.
This trait reverses the hierarchy, so that the fallible trait is a supertrait of the infallible one: all infallible folders are required to also be fallible (which is a trivial blanket implementation). This of course makes much more sense! It also enables the `Error` associated type to sit on the fallible trait, where it sensibly belongs.
There is one downside however: folders expose a `tcx` accessor method. Since the blanket fallible implementation for infallible folders only has access to a generic `F: TypeFolder`, we need that trait to expose such an accessor to which we can delegate. Alternatively it's possible to extract that accessor into a separate `HasTcx` trait (or similar) that would then be a supertrait of both the fallible and infallible folder traits: this would ensure that there's only one unambiguous `tcx` method, at the cost of a little additional boilerplate. If desired, I can submit that as a separate PR.
r? @jackh726
Remove the source archive functionality of ArchiveWriter
We now build archives through strictly additive means rather than taking an existing archive and potentially substracting parts. This is simpler and makes it easier to swap out the archive writer in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97485.
* config_proc_macro: fix failing doctests
* ci: include config_proc_macro crate in ci
* [review] working native windows ci
* [fix] add --locked file for ci
* [fix] quoting of cmd variables
