Remove unintended link
Since `#[link_section]` is enclosed in braces, it was being confused with a link during docs compilation.
This caused compilation to fail when running `x dist` since it emitted a warning regarding broken links.
Fix type reference in documents which was being confused with html tags.
Running `x dist` was failing due to it invoking commands with `-D warnings`, which emitted a warning about unclosed html tags.
library: fix some stability annotations
This PR updates some stability attributes to correctly reflect when some items actually got stabilized. Found while testing https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132481.
### `core::char` / `std::char`
In https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/26192, the `core::char` module got "stabilized" for 1.2.0, but the `core` crate itself was still unstable until 1.6.0.
In https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/49698, the `std::char` module was changed to a re-export of `core::char`, making `std::char` appear as "stable since 1.2.0", even though it was already stable in 1.0.0.
By marking `core::char` as stable since 1.0.0, the docs will show correct versions for both `core::char` (since 1.6.0) and `std::char` (since 1.0.0). This is also consistent with the stabilities of similar re-exported modules like `core::mem`/`std::mem` for example.
### `{core,std}::array` and `{core,std}::array::TryFromSliceError`
In https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/58302, the `core::array::TryFromSliceError` type got stabilized for 1.34.0, together with `TryFrom`. At that point the `core::array` module was still unstable and a `std::array` re-export didn't exist, but `core::array::TryFromSliceError` could still be named due to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/95956 to existing yet.
Then, `core::array` got stabilized and `std::array` got added, first targeting 1.36.0 in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/60657, but then getting backported for 1.35.0 in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/60838.
This means that `core::array` and `std::array` actually got stabilized in 1.35.0 and `core::array::TryFromSliceError` was accessible through the unstable module in 1.34.0 -- mark them as such so that the docs display the correct versions.
rustdoc: skip stability inheritance for some item kinds
For some item kinds it's incorrect to inherit their parent's stability, because they might be accessible without referring to the parent directly -- This PR removes the stability inheritance for these items and reverts their displayed stability to that before https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130798.
Impl items, both inherent and trait impls, have a stability, but it is ignored when checking for enabled features. However, impl items are automatically unstable if they're nested inside an unstable module -- this caused the children of impl to inherit the instability and lead to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132440.
Furthermore, for associated items only the stability of the associated item itself is checked and not that of its parent impl. This is true even for trait impls and we have [relied on this behavior in the standard library in the past](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.37.0/std/slice/trait.SliceConcatExt.html#tymethod.concat), so these also shouldn't inherit the impl's stability.
I've also removed the stability inheritance for primitives and keywords so that viewing e.g. [the `i32` docs on `core`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/core/primitive.i32.html) will no longer show "since 1.6.0". Note that we currently don't annotate stability for the keyword docs, but if we start doing so in the future then this is probably more correct.
fixes (after backport) https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132440
new lint: `source_item_ordering`
changelog: [`source_item_ordering`]: Introduced a new restriction lint that checks the ordering of items in Modules, Enums, Structs, Impls and Traits.
From the written documentation:
> Why restrict this?
> Keeping a consistent ordering throughout the codebase helps with working as a team, and possibly improves maintainability of the codebase. The idea is that by defining a consistent and enforceable rule for how source files are structured, less time will be wasted during reviews on a topic that is (under most circumstances) not relevant to the logic implemented in the code. Sometimes this will be referred to as "bike-shedding".
>
> Keep in mind, that ordering source code alphabetically can lead to reduced performance in cases where the most commonly used enum variant isn't the first entry anymore, and similar optimizations that can reduce branch misses, cache locality and such. Either don't use this lint if that's relevant, or disable the lint in modules or items specifically where it matters. Other solutions can be to use profile guided optimization (PGO), or other advanced optimization methods.
I tried to build it as configurable as possible, as such a highly opinionated lint should be adjustable to personal opinions.
I'm open to any input and will be available both here and on the zulip for communication. In the meantime I'll be testing this lint against my own code-bases, which I've (manually) kept ordered with the default config, to see how well it works in practice.
And lastly, a big thanks to the community for making clippy the best linter there is!
Add a bunch of mailmap entries
This adds a bunch of missing mailmap entries for many people. These are needed when using rust-lang/team information in rust-lang/thanks (https://github.com/rust-lang/thanks/pull/53), as the emails there may differ.
These are "easy" ones, where there was a mailmap entry already, making it clear which one is the preferred email address.
Also treat `impl` definition parent as transparent regarding modules
This PR changes the `non_local_definitions` lint logic to also consider `impl` definition parent as transparent regarding modules.
See tests and explanation in the changes.
``````@rustbot`````` label +L-non_local_definitions
Fixes *(after beta-backport)* #132427
cc ``````@leighmcculloch``````
r? ``````@jieyouxu``````
Add a Few Codegen Tests
Closes#86109Closes#64219
Those issues somehow got fixed over time.
So, this PR adds a couple of codegen tests to ensure we don't regress in the future.
Move versioned Apple LLVM targets from `rustc_target` to `rustc_codegen_ssa`
Fully specified LLVM targets contain the OS version on macOS/iOS/tvOS/watchOS/visionOS, and this version depends on the deployment target environment variables like `MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET`, `IPHONEOS_DEPLOYMENT_TARGET` etc.
We would like to move this to later in the compilation pipeline, both because it feels impure to access environment variables when fetching target information, but mostly because we need access to more information from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130883 to do https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/118204. See also https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/129342#issuecomment-2335156119 for some discussion.
The first and second commit does the actual refactor, it should be a non-functional change, the third commit adds diagnostics for invalid deployment targets, which are now possible to do because we have access to the session.
Tested with the same commands as in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130435.
r? ``````@petrochenkov``````
Do not suggest `#[derive(Copy)]` when we wanted a `!Copy` type.
Do not say "`Copy` is not implemented for `T` but `Copy` is".
Do not talk about `Trait` having no implementations when `!Trait` was desired.
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `{gen block@$DIR/gen_block_is_coro.rs:7:5: 7:8}: Coroutine` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/gen_block_is_coro.rs:6:13
|
LL | fn foo() -> impl Coroutine<Yield = u32, Return = ()> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the trait `Coroutine` is not implemented for `{gen block@$DIR/gen_block_is_coro.rs:7:5: 7:8}`
LL | gen { yield 42 }
| ---------------- return type was inferred to be `{gen block@$DIR/gen_block_is_coro.rs:7:5: 7:8}` here
```
The secondary span label is new.
When a trait is not implemented for a type, but there *is* an `impl`
for another type or different trait params, we format the output to
use highlighting in the same way that E0308 does for types.
The logic accounts for 3 cases:
- When both the type and trait in the expected predicate and the candidate are different
- When only the types are different
- When only the trait generic params are different
For each case, we use slightly different formatting and wording.
