[`wildcard_imports`] Modules that contain `prelude` are also allowed
This commit fixes#10846 by checking if the path segment contains the word "prelude", allowing us
`use module_prelude::*`.
changelog: [`wildcard_imports`]: Modules that contain `prelude` are also allowed
refactor and cleanup the leak check, add it to new solver
ended up being a bit more involved than I wanted but is hopefully still easy enough to review as a single PR, can split it into separate ones otherwise.
this can be reviewed commit by commit:
a473d55cdb9284aa2b01282d1b529a2a4d26547b 31a686646534ca006d906ec757ece4e771d6f973 949039c107852a5e36361c08b62821a0613656f5 242917bf5170d9a723c6c8e23e9d9d0c2fa8dc9d ed2b25a7aa28be3184be9e3022c2796a30eaad87 are all pretty straightforward.
03dd83b4c3f4ff27558f5c8ab859bd9f83db1d04 makes it easier to refactor coherence in a later commit, see the commit description, cc `@oli-obk`
4fe311d807a77b6270f384e41689bf5d58f46aec I don't quite remember what we wanted to test here, this definitely doesn't test that the occurs check doesn't cause incorrect errors in coherence, also cc `@oli-obk` here. I may end up writing a new test for this myself later.
5c200d88a91b75bd0875b973150655bd581ef97a is the main refactor of the leak check, changing it to take the `outer_universe` instead of getting it from a snapshot. Using a snapshot requires us to be in a probe which we aren't in the new solver, it also just feels dirty as snapshots don't really have anything to do with universes.
with all of this cfc230d54188d9c7ed867a9a0d1f51be77b485f9 is now kind of trivial.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Don't typecheck recovered method call from suggestion
Only make the use-dot-operator-to-call-method suggestion, but do not double down and use the recovered type to perform method call typechecking as it will produce confusing diagnostics relevant for the *fixed* code.
### Code Sample
```rust
struct Client;
impl Client {
fn post<T: std::ops::Add>(&self, _: T, _: T) {}
}
fn f() {
let c = Client;
post(c, ());
}
```
### Before This PR
```
error[[E0277]](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/error_codes/E0277.html): cannot add `()` to `()`
--> src/lib.rs:9:5
|
9 | post(c, ());
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ no implementation for `() + ()`
|
= help: the trait `Add` is not implemented for `()`
note: required by a bound in `Client::post`
--> src/lib.rs:4:16
|
4 | fn post<T: std::ops::Add>(&self, _: T, _: T) {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `Client::post`
error[[E0061]](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/error_codes/E0061.html): this function takes 2 arguments but 1 argument was supplied
--> src/lib.rs:9:5
|
9 | post(c, ());
| ^^^^ an argument of type `()` is missing
|
note: method defined here
--> src/lib.rs:4:8
|
4 | fn post<T: std::ops::Add>(&self, _: T, _: T) {}
| ^^^^ ----- ---- ----
help: provide the argument
|
9 | post((), ())(c, ());
| ++++++++
error[[E0425]](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/error_codes/E0425.html): cannot find function `post` in this scope
--> src/lib.rs:9:5
|
9 | post(c, ());
| ^^^^ not found in this scope
|
help: use the `.` operator to call the method `post` on `&Client`
|
9 - post(c, ());
9 + c.post(());
|
Some errors have detailed explanations: E0061, E0277, E0425.
For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0061`.
```
### After This PR
```
error[E0425]: cannot find function `post` in this scope
--> tests/ui/typeck/issue-106929.rs:9:5
|
9 | post(c, ());
| ^^^^ not found in this scope
|
help: use the `.` operator to call the method `post` on `&Client`
|
9 - post(c, ());
9 + c.post(());
|
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0425`.
```
Fixes#106929.
`EarlyBinder::new` -> `EarlyBinder::bind`
for consistency with `Binder::bind`. it may make sense to also add `EarlyBinder::dummy` in places where we know that no parameters exist, but I left that out of this PR.
r? `@jackh726` `@kylematsuda`
`EarlyBinder::new` -> `EarlyBinder::bind`
for consistency with `Binder::bind`. it may make sense to also add `EarlyBinder::dummy` in places where we know that no parameters exist, but I left that out of this PR.
r? `@jackh726` `@kylematsuda`
bootstrap: Various Step refactors
This ended up being a bunch of only somewhat related changes, sorry 😓 on the bright side, they're all fairly small and well-commented in the commit messages.
- Document `ShouldRun::crates`
- Switch Steps from crates to crate_or_deps where possible
and document why the single remaining place can't switch
- Switch doc::{Std, Rustc} to `crate_or_deps`
Previously they were using `all_krates` and various hacks to determine
which crates to document. Switch them to `crate_or_deps` so `ShouldRun`
tells them which crate to document instead of having to guess.
This also makes a few other refactors:
- Remove the now unused `all_krates`; new code should only use
`crate_or_deps`.
- Add tests for documenting Std
- Remove the unnecessary `run_cargo_rustdoc_for` closure so that we only
run cargo once
- Give a more helpful error message when documenting a no_std target
- Use `builder.msg` in the Steps instead of `builder.info`
- Extend `msg` and `description` to work with any subcommand
Previously `description` only supported `Testing` and `Benchmarking`,
and `msg` gave weird results for `doc` (it would say `Docing`).
- Add a `make_run_crates` function and use it Rustc and Std
This fixes the panic from the previous commit.
- Allow checking individual crates
This is useful for profiling metadata generation.
This comes very close to removing all_krates, but doesn't quite -
there's one last usage left in `doc`. This is fixed in a later commit.
- Give a more helpful error when calling `cargo_crates_in_set` for an alias
Before:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'no entry found for key', builder.rs:110:30
```
After:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'missing crate for path library', check.rs:89:26
```
fix: dedup `static_candidates` before report
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/103646
`record_static_candidate` had been executed twice, resulting in the presence of two identical `CandidateSource::Trait(Cat)` in static_candidates. This PR aims to deduplication the `static_candidates` list, allowing it to execute `suggest_associated_call_syntax` properly.
Uplift `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` lint
This PR aims at uplifting the `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` lint into two lints.
## `invalid_from_utf8_unchecked`
(deny-by-default)
The `invalid_from_utf8_unchecked` lint checks for calls to `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked` and `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked_mut` with an invalid UTF-8 literal.
### Example
```rust
unsafe {
std::str::from_utf8_unchecked(b"cl\x82ippy");
}
```
### Explanation
Creating such a `str` would result in undefined behavior as per documentation for `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked` and `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked_mut`.
## `invalid_from_utf8`
(warn-by-default)
The `invalid_from_utf8` lint checks for calls to `std::str::from_utf8` and `std::str::from_utf8_mut` with an invalid UTF-8 literal.
### Example
```rust
std::str::from_utf8(b"ru\x82st");
```
### Explanation
Trying to create such a `str` would always return an error as per documentation for `std::str::from_utf8` and `std::str::from_utf8_mut`.
-----
Mostly followed the instructions for uplifting a clippy lint described here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99696#pullrequestreview-1134072751
````@rustbot```` label: +I-lang-nominated
r? compiler
-----
For Clippy:
changelog: Moves: Uplifted `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` into rustc
Uplift `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` lint
This PR aims at uplifting the `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` lint into two lints.
## `invalid_from_utf8_unchecked`
(deny-by-default)
The `invalid_from_utf8_unchecked` lint checks for calls to `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked` and `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked_mut` with an invalid UTF-8 literal.
### Example
```rust
unsafe {
std::str::from_utf8_unchecked(b"cl\x82ippy");
}
```
### Explanation
Creating such a `str` would result in undefined behavior as per documentation for `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked` and `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked_mut`.
## `invalid_from_utf8`
(warn-by-default)
The `invalid_from_utf8` lint checks for calls to `std::str::from_utf8` and `std::str::from_utf8_mut` with an invalid UTF-8 literal.
### Example
```rust
std::str::from_utf8(b"ru\x82st");
```
### Explanation
Trying to create such a `str` would always return an error as per documentation for `std::str::from_utf8` and `std::str::from_utf8_mut`.
-----
Mostly followed the instructions for uplifting a clippy lint described here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99696#pullrequestreview-1134072751
````@rustbot```` label: +I-lang-nominated
r? compiler
-----
For Clippy:
changelog: Moves: Uplifted `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` into rustc
we can otherwise assign a hidden type to the opaque which
causes ICE if we don't use `take_opaque_types` during
coherence. This is annoying so I didn't bother. Added a test
showing the behavior this prevents.
Optimize scalar and scalar pair representations loaded from ByRef in llvm
in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/105653 I noticed that we were generating suboptimal LLVM IR if we had a `ConstValue::ByRef` that could be represented by a `ScalarPair`. Before https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/105653 this is probably rare, but after it, every slice will go down this suboptimal code path that requires LLVM to untangle a bunch of indirections and translate static allocations that are only used once to read a scalar pair from.
Only make the use-dot-operator-to-call-method suggestion, but do not
double down and use the recovered type to perform method call
typechecking as it will produce confusing diagnostics on the "fixed"
code.
This option was introduced three years ago, but it's never been
meaningfully used, and `default` is the only acceptable value.
Also, I think the `Partition` trait presents an interface that is too
closely tied to the existing strategy and would probably be wrong for
other strategies. (My rule of thumb is to not make something generic
until there are at least two instances of it, to avoid this kind of
problem.)
Also, I don't think providing multiple partitioning strategies to the
user is a good idea, because the compiler already has enough obscure
knobs.
This commit removes the option, along with the `Partition` trait, and
the `Partitioner` and `DefaultPartitioning` types. I left the existing
code in `compiler/rustc_monomorphize/src/partitioning/default.rs`,
though I could be persuaded that moving it into
`compiler/rustc_monomorphize/src/partitioning/mod.rs` is better.
`[T; N]::zip` is "eager" but most zips are mapped.
This causes poor optimization in generated code.
This is a fundamental design issue and "zip" is
"prime real estate" in terms of function names,
so let's free it up again.
Make `TrustedStep` require `Copy`
All the implementations of the trait already are `Copy`, and this seems to be enough to simplify the implementations enough to make the MIR inliner willing to inline basics like `Range::next`.
r? `@thomcc`
deps: drop serde feature from url, drop rustc-workspace-hack
Cargo now have it's own workspace and rustc dropped [`rustc-workspace-hack`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/109133), so no need to unify features here; drop rustc-workspace-hack.
changelog: none
Changelog for Rust 1.70 🔨
Roses are red,
violets are blue,
damn I have an exam to cram,
and this rhyme is a scam
---
This poem is... certainly something... Anyways, hope whoever is reading this, has a lovely day full of sunshine without the need to study :D
---
changelog: none
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #111558 (Move tests)
- #111827 (Add build instructions for cranelift backend as part of Rust repo)
- #111988 (Make `TyKind: Debug` have less verbose output)
- #112022 (Check nested obligations during coercion unify in new solver)
- #112057 (Suggest correct `self_ty`)
- #112063 (Add a test for issue 110457/incremental ICE with closures with the same span)
Failed merges:
- #112068 (Move tests from `ui/discrim` dir)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
