Remove last vestiges of skippng ident span hashing
This removes a comment that no longer applies, and properly hashes
the full ident for path segments.
implement SIMD gather/scatter via vector getelementptr
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/portable-simd/issues/271
However, I don't *really* know what I am doing here... Cc ``@workingjubilee`` ``@calebzulawski``
I didn't do anything for cranelift -- ``@bjorn3`` not sure if it's okay for that backend to temporarily break. I'm happy to cherry-pick a patch that adds cranelift support. :)
Create (unstable) 2024 edition
[On Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/Deprecating.20macro.20scoping.20shenanigans/near/272860652), there was a small aside regarding creating the 2024 edition now as opposed to later. There was a reasonable amount of support and no stated opposition.
This change creates the 2024 edition in the compiler and creates a prelude for the 2024 edition. There is no current difference between the 2021 and 2024 editions. Cargo and other tools will need to be updated separately, as it's not in the same repository. This change permits the vast majority of work towards the next edition to proceed _now_ instead of waiting until 2024.
For sanity purposes, I've merged the "hello" UI tests into a single file with multiple revisions. Otherwise we'd end up with a file per edition, despite them being essentially identical.
````@rustbot```` label +T-lang +S-waiting-on-review
Not sure on the relevant team, to be honest.
* split `fuzzy_provenance_casts` into a ptr2int and a int2ptr lint
* feature gate both lints
* update documentation to be more realistic short term
* add tests for these lints
`MultiSpan` contains labels, which are more complicated with the
introduction of diagnostic translation and will use types from
`rustc_errors` - however, `rustc_errors` depends on `rustc_span` so
`rustc_span` cannot use types like `DiagnosticMessage` without
dependency cycles. Introduce a new `rustc_error_messages` crate that can
contain `DiagnosticMessage` and `MultiSpan`.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
When encountering an unsatisfied trait bound, if there are no other
suggestions, mention all the types that *do* implement that trait:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `f32: Foo` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:22:6
|
LL | impl Baz<f32> for f32 { }
| ^^^^^^^^ the trait `Foo` is not implemented for `f32`
|
= help: the following other types implement trait `Foo`:
Option<T>
i32
str
note: required by a bound in `Baz`
--> $DIR/impl_wf.rs:18:31
|
LL | trait Baz<U: ?Sized> where U: Foo { }
| ^^^ required by this bound in `Baz`
```
Mention implementers of traits in `ImplObligation`s.
Do not mention other `impl`s for closures, ranges and `?`.
Attempts to improve method name suggestions when a matching method name
is not found. The approach taken is use the Levenshtein distance and
account for substrings having a high distance but can sometimes be very
close to the intended method (eg. empty vs is_empty).
Spellchecking compiler comments
This PR cleans up the rest of the spelling mistakes in the compiler comments. This PR does not change any literal or code spelling issues.
async: Give predictable name to binding generated from .await expressions.
This name makes it to debuginfo and allows debuggers to identify such bindings and their captured versions in suspended async fns.
This will be useful for async stack traces, as discussed in https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/async-debugging-logical-stack-traces-setting-goals-collecting-examples/15547.
I don't know if this needs some discussion by ````@rust-lang/compiler,```` e.g. about the name of the binding (`__awaitee`) or about the fact that this PR introduces a (soft) guarantee about a compiler generated name. Although, regarding the later, I think the same reasoning applies here as it does for debuginfo in general.
r? ````@tmandry````
Add the generic_associated_types_extended feature
Right now, this only ignore obligations that reference new placeholders in `poly_project_and_unify_type`. In the future, this might do other things, like allowing object-safe GATs.
**This feature is *incomplete* and quite likely unsound. This is mostly just for testing out potential future APIs using a "relaxed" set of rules until we figure out *proper* rules.**
Also drive by cleanup of adding a `ProjectAndUnifyResult` enum instead of using a `Result<Result<Option>>`.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
[1/2] Implement macro meta-variable expressions
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93545#issuecomment-1050963295
The logic behind `length`, `index` and `count` was removed but the parsing code is still present, i.e., everything is simply ignored like `ignored`.
r? ``@petrochenkov``
Treat unstable lints as unknown
This change causes unstable lints to be ignored if the `unknown_lints`
lint is allowed. To achieve this, it also changes lints to apply as soon
as they are processed. Previously, lints in the same set were processed
as a batch and then all simultaneously applied.
Implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/469
Merge `#[deprecated]` and `#[rustc_deprecated]`
The first commit makes "reason" an alias for "note" in `#[rustc_deprecated]`, while still prohibiting it in `#[deprecated]`.
The second commit changes "suggestion" to not just be a feature of `#[rustc_deprecated]`. This is placed behind the new `deprecated_suggestion` feature. This needs a tracking issue; let me know if this PR will be approved and I can create one.
The third commit is what permits `#[deprecated]` to be used when `#![feature(staged_api)]` is enabled. This isn't yet used in stdlib (only tests), as it would require duplicating all deprecation attributes until a bootstrap occurs. I intend to submit a follow-up PR that replaces all uses and removes the remaining `#[rustc_deprecated]` code after the next bootstrap.
`@rustbot` label +T-libs-api +C-feature-request +A-attributes +S-waiting-on-review
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #91804 (Make some `Clone` impls `const`)
- #92541 (Mention intent of `From` trait in its docs)
- #93057 (Add Iterator::collect_into)
- #94739 (Suggest `if let`/`let_else` for refutable pat in `let`)
- #94754 (Warn users about `||` in let chain expressions)
- #94763 (Add documentation about lifetimes to thread::scope.)
- #94768 (Ignore `close_read_wakes_up` test on SGX platform)
- #94772 (Add miri to the well known conditional compilation names and values)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
This change causes unstable lints to be ignored if the `unknown_lints`
lint is allowed. To achieve this, it also changes lints to apply as soon
as they are processed. Previously, lints in the same set were processed
as a batch and then all simultaneously applied.
Implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/469
Remove ordering traits from `rustc_span::hygiene::LocalExpnId`
Part of work on #90317.
Also adds a negative impl block as a form of documentation and a roadblock to regression.
Add well known values to `--check-cfg` implementation
This pull-request adds well known values for the well known names via `--check-cfg=values()`.
[RFC 3013: Checking conditional compilation at compile time](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3013-conditional-compilation-checking.html#checking-conditional-compilation-at-compile-time) doesn't define this at all, but this seems a nice improvement.
The activation is done by a empty `values()` (new syntax) similar to `names()` except that `names(foo)` also activate well known names while `values(aa, "aa", "kk")` would not.
As stated this use a different activation logic because well known values for the well known names are not always sufficient.
In fact this is problematic for every `target_*` cfg because of non builtin targets, as the current implementation use those built-ins targets to create the list the well known values.
The implementation is straight forward, first we gather (if necessary) all the values (lazily or not) and then we apply them.
r? ```@petrochenkov```
ARM: Only allow using d16-d31 with asm! when supported by the target
Support can be determined by checking for the "d32" LLVM feature.
r? ```````````````@nagisa```````````````
Only create a single expansion for each inline integration.
The inlining integrator used to create one expansion for each span from the callee body.
This PR reverses the logic to create a single expansion for the whole call,
which is more consistent with how macro expansions work for macros.
This should remove the large memory regression in #91743.
Fix several asm! related issues
This is a combination of several fixes, each split into a separate commit. Splitting these into PRs is not practical since they conflict with each other.
Fixes#92378Fixes#85247
r? ``@nagisa``
The previous approach of checking for the reserve-r9 target feature
didn't actually work because LLVM only sets this feature very late when
initializing the per-function subtarget.
