Ensure borrows of fn/closure params do not outlive invocations.
Does this by adding a new CallSiteScope to the region (or rather code extent) hierarchy, which outlives even the ParameterScope (which in turn outlives the DestructionScope of a fn/closure's body).
Fix#29793
r? @nikomatsakis
Currently, a coherence error based on overlapping impls simply mentions
the trait, and points to the two conflicting impls:
```
error: conflicting implementations for trait `Foo`
```
With this commit, the error will include all input types to the
trait (including the `Self` type) after unification between the
overlapping impls. In other words, the error message will provide
feedback with full type details, like:
```
error: conflicting implementations of trait `Foo<u32>` for type `u8`:
```
When the `Self` type for the two impls unify to an inference variable,
it is elided in the output, since "for type `_`" is just noise in that
case.
Closes#23980
r? @nikomatsakis
Currently, a coherence error based on overlapping impls simply mentions
the trait, and points to the two conflicting impls:
```
error: conflicting implementations for trait `Foo`
```
With this commit, the error will include all input types to the
trait (including the `Self` type) after unification between the
overlapping impls. In other words, the error message will provide
feedback with full type details, like:
```
error: conflicting implementations of trait `Foo<u32>` for type `u8`:
```
When the `Self` type for the two impls unify to an inference variable,
it is elided in the output, since "for type `_`" is just noise in that
case.
Closes#23980
Turns out that calling `resolve_type_variables_if_possible` in a O(n^2)
loop is a bad idea. Now we just resolve each copy of the region variable
to its lowest name each time (we resolve the region variable to its lowest
name, rather than to its unify-table name to avoid the risk of
the unify-table name changing infinitely many times. That may be
not a problem in practice, but I am not sure of it).
We can now handle name resolution errors and get past type checking (if we're a bit lucky). This is the first step towards doing code completion for partial programs (we need error recovery in the parser and early access to save-analysis).
This reduces iteration time (`make rustc-stage1`) for moved syntax extensions from 11 minutes to 3 minutes on my machine.
Because of the signature change, this is a [breaking-change] for people directly calling `expand_crate`. I think it is rare: from GitHub search, only case I found is [glassful](https://github.com/kmcallister/glassful).
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29935
The attributes `deprecated` and `rustc_deprecated` are completely independent in this implementation and it leads to some noticeable code duplication. Representing `deprecated` as
```
Stability {
level: Stable { since: "" },
feature: "",
depr: Some(Deprecation),
}
```
or, contrariwise, splitting rustc_deprecation from stability makes most of the duplication go away.
I can do this refactoring, but before doing it I must be sure, that further divergence of `deprecated` and `rustc_deprecated` is certainly not a goal.
cc @llogiq
resolve_lifetime.rs: Switch from BlockScope to FnScope in ScopeChain
construction. Lifetimes introduced by a fn signature are scoped to the
call-site for that fn. (Note `add_scope_and_walk_fn` must only add
FnScope for the walk of body, *not* of the fn signature.)
region.rs: Introduce new CodeExtentData::CallSiteScope variant. Use
CodeExtentData as the cx.parent, rather than just a NodeId. Change
DestructionScopeData to CallSiteScopeData.
regionck.rs: Thread call_site_scope via Rcx; constrain fn return
values.
(update; incorporated review feedback from niko.)
What I've done here is try to make the code match what vcvars does much more closely. It now chooses which SDK to find based on the version of MSVC that it found. It also bases the decision of whether to find all the things on whether `VCINSTALLDIR` has been set, which is more likely to have only been set by an invocation of vcvars, unlike previously where it would do some things only if `LIB` wasn't set even though there was a valid use case for libraries to add themselves to `LIB` without having invoked vcvars.
There are still some debug `println!`s so people can test the PR and make sure it works correctly on various setups.
It supports VS 2015, 2013, and 2012. People who want to use versions of VS older (or newer) than that will have to manually invoke the appropriate vcvars bat file to set the proper environment variables themselves.
Do not merge yet.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/30229
This handles cases when the LLVM used isn't configured will the 'usual' targets. Also, cases where LLVM is shared are also handled (ie with `LD_LIBRARY_PATH` etc).
This PR reverts #29543 and instead implements proper support for "=*m" and "+*m" indirect output operands. This provides a framework on top of which support for plain memory operands ("m", "=m" and "+m") can be implemented.
This also fixes the liveness analysis pass not handling read/write operands correctly.
This handles cases when the LLVM used isn't configured will the 'usual'
targets. Also, cases where LLVM is shared are also handled (ie with
`LD_LIBRARY_PATH` etc).
Many of the structs in `str` that are used as part of its methods do not have links to the methods.
This is especially annoying when a Google search drops you into the documentation of the struct, when you really wanted to get to the method of the same name.
This patch adds those links.
This PR for #30299 adds the name of the type where the field is missing.
The span that's used for the error seems correct. What may be confusing is when the initializer with the missing field contains other intializers. These are then included in the span. For example, consider the following listing.
struct A {
a1: i32,
a2: B,
}
struct B {
b1: i32,
b2: i32
}
fn main() {
let x = A {
a2: B {
b1: 1,
b2: 1
},
};
}
It will display the following code snippet along with the message that field `a2` is missing:
let x = A {
a2: B {
b1: 1,
b2: 1
},
};
By adding the name of the type it's clearer where the field is missing.
r? @nrc
Since PR #30294 unintentionally fixed issue #30159, it can cause breakage for a different reason than I originally stated in the PR (see #30159, I characterized the issue precisely there).
This commit limits the scope of the breakage to what I originally stated in the PR by "unfixing" the backwards incompatible part of #30159.
I think fixing #30159 has enough potential for breakage to warrant a crater run. If you disagree, I can cancel this PR, leaving it fixed.
