Properly render HRTBs
```rust
pub fn test<T>()
where
for<'a> &'a T: Iterator,
{}
```
This will now render properly including the `for<'a>`
I do not know if this covers all cases, it only covers everything that I could think of that includes `for` and lifetimes in where bounds.
Also someone need to mentor me on how to add a proper rustdoc test for this.
Resolves#78482
Use HTTPS links where possible
While looking at #86583, I wondered how many other (insecure) HTTP links were in `rustc`. This changes most other `http` links to `https`. While most of the links are in comments or documentation, there are a few other HTTP links that are used by CI that are changed to HTTPS.
Notes:
- I didn't change any to or in licences
- Some links don't support HTTPS :(
- Some `http` links were dead, in those cases I upgraded them to their new places (all of which used HTTPS)
Check that `#[cmse_nonsecure_entry]` is applied to a function definition
This PR fixes#83475. The compiler currently neglects to check whether `#[cmse_nonsecure_entry]` is applied to a function (and not, say, a struct) definition, leading to an ICE later on when the type checker attempts to retrieve the function signature. I have fixed this problem by adding an appropriate check to the `check_attr` pass, so that an error is reported instead of an ICE.
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #86330 (Change how edition based future compatibility warnings are handled)
- #86513 (Rustdoc: Do not list impl when trait has doc(hidden))
- #86592 (Use `#[non_exhaustive]` where appropriate)
- #86608 (chore(rustdoc): remove unused members of RenderType)
- #86624 (Update compiler-builtins)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Use `#[non_exhaustive]` where appropriate
Due to the std/alloc split, it is not possible to make `alloc::collections::TryReserveError::AllocError` non-exhaustive without having an unstable, doc-hidden method to construct (which negates the benefits from `#[non_exhaustive]`).
`@rustbot` label +C-cleanup +T-libs +S-waiting-on-review
Change how edition based future compatibility warnings are handled
This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85894 by updating how future compatibility lints work. This makes it more apparent that future compatibility warnings can happen for several different reasons.
For now `FutureCompatibilityReasons` are limited to three reasons, but we can easily add more.
This also updates the generated warning for FCW's that signal code that will error in a future edition. This makes the diagnostics between FCWs at edition boundaries more distinct from those not happening at an edition boundary.
r? ``@m-ou-se``
Use https for sourceforge during CI
I saw that we use http during CI opening up the CI process to on the wire tampering.
based on #86573
r? `@pietroalbini`
Add `BuildHasher::hash_one` as unstable
Inspired by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/86140/files#diff-246941135168fbc44fce120385ee9c3156e08a1c3e2697985b56dcb8d728eedeR2416, where I wanted to write a quick test for a `Hash` implementation and it took more of a dance than I'd hoped.
It looks like this would be handy in hashtable implementations, too -- a quick look at hashbrown found two places where it needs to do the same dance:
6302512a8a/src/map.rs (L247-L270)
I wanted to get a "seems plausible" from a libs member before making a tracking issue, so random-sampling the intersection of highfive and governance gave me...
r? `@joshtriplett`
(As always, bikeshed away! And let me know if I missed something obvious again that I should have used instead.)
Don't lint :pat when re-parsing a macro from another crate.
`compile_macro` is used both when compiling the original definition in the crate that defines it, and to compile the macro when loading it when compiling a crate that uses it. We should only emit lints in the first case.
This adds a `is_definition: bool` to pass this information in, so we don't warn about things that only concern the definition site.
Fixes#86567
Even if the content from box is used in a sharef-ref context,
we capture the box entirerly.
This is motivated by:
1) We only capture data that is on the stack.
2) Capturing data from within the box might end up moving more data than
the user anticipated.
tidy: verify that test revisions with --target have associated needs-llvm-components directives
This ensures that people who tend to write `--target` `#[no_core]` tests don't miss specifying the `needs-llvm-components` directive. This is necessary for the test suite to pass when LLVM is compiled with a subset of components enabled.
While here I also took the opportunity to implement a more fine-grained handling of the ignore directives, so that they are evaluated for each revision, rather than for the entire test. With this even if people have `arm` component disabled, only the revision that depends on the arm component will not run.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82405
Otherwise something that ought to seemingly work like `//[x86]
needs-llvm-components: x86` or `//[nll_beyond]should-fail` do not get
evaluated properly.
Herein we verify that all of the tests that specify a `--target`
compile-flag, are also annotated with the minimal set of required llvm
components necessary to run that test.
