Various impl trait in assoc tys cleanups
r? `@compiler-errors`
All commits except for the last are pure refactorings. 274dab5bd658c97886a8987340bf50ae57900c39 allows struct fields to participate in deciding whether a function has an opaque in its signature.
best reviewed commit by commit
Fix rustdoc gui tester
Problem was that the `main` was always exiting with `0`, whether or not there was an error. It led to failing GUI tests being ignored in the CI since no one saw them.
r? ````@klensy````
[tests/rustdoc] Add @files command
The ``````@!has`````` checks is very problematic as it wouldn't catch if the file scheme is updated and the file is generated again. ``````@files`````` allows to ensure that the given folder contains exactly the provided entries (files and folders).
I'm wondering if we should forbid the ``````@!has`````` for files. To be discussed after this PR I suppose.
r? `````@notriddle`````
Stop hiding const eval limit in external macros
fixes#112748
We don't emit a hard error if there was a previous deny lint triggering with the same message. If that lint ends up not being emitted, we ICE and don't emit an error either.
Migrate `item_bounds` to `ty::Clause`
Should be simpler than the next PR that's coming up. Last three commits are the relevant ones.
r? ``@oli-obk`` or ``@lcnr``
Don't ICE on unnormalized struct tail in layout computation
1. We try to compute a `SizeSkeleton` even if a layout error occurs, but we really only need to do this if we get `LayoutError::Unknown`, since that means our type is too polymorphic to actually compute the full layout. If we have other errors, like `LayoutError::NormalizationError` or `LayoutError::Cycle`, then we can't really make any progress, since this represents an actual error.
2. Avoid using `normalize_erasing_regions` and `struct_tail_erasing_lifetimes` since those ICE on normalization errors, and since we may call `layout_of` in HIR typeck, we don't know for certain that we're on the happy path.
Fixes#112736
Always register sized obligation for argument
Removes a "hack" that skips registering sized obligations for parameters that are simple identifiers. This doesn't seem to affect diagnostics because we're probably already being smart enough about deduplicating identical error messages anyways.
Fixes#112608
rustc_session: default to -Z plt=yes on non-x86_64
Per the discussion in #106380 plt=no isn't a great default, and rust-lang/compiler-team#581 decided that the default should be PLT=yes for everything except x86_64. Not everyone agrees about the x86_64 part of this change, but this at least is an improvement in the state of things without changing the x86_64 situation, so I've attempted making this change in the name of not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Please let me know if I've messed this up somehow - I'm not wholly confident I got this right.
r? `@nikic`
Avoid guessing unknown trait implementation in suggestions
When a trait is used without specifying the implementation (e.g. calling a non-member associated function without fully-qualified syntax) and there are multiple implementations available, use a placeholder comment for the implementation type in the suggestion instead of picking a random implementation.
Example:
```
fn main() {
let _ = Default::default();
}
```
Previous output:
```
error[E0790]: cannot call associated function on trait without specifying the corresponding `impl` type
--> test.rs:2:13
|
2 | let _ = Default::default();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot call associated function of trait
|
help: use a fully-qualified path to a specific available implementation (273 found)
|
2 | let _ = <FileTimes as Default>::default();
| +++++++++++++ +
```
New output:
```
error[E0790]: cannot call associated function on trait without specifying the corresponding `impl` type
--> test.rs:2:13
|
2 | let _ = Default::default();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot call associated function of trait
|
help: use a fully-qualified path to a specific available implementation (273 found)
|
2 | let _ = </* self type */ as Default>::default();
| +++++++++++++++++++ +
```
Fixes#112897
style-guide: Add language disclaiming any effects on non-default Rust styles
Make it clear that the style guide saying "must" doesn't forbid
developers from doing differently (as though any power on this Earth
could do that) and doesn't forbid tools from allowing any particular
configuration options.
Otherwise, people might wonder (for instance) if there's a semantic difference
between "must" and "should" in the style guide, and whether tools are "allowed"
to offer configurability of something that says "must".
style-guide: Organizational and editing tweaks (no semantic changes)
I'd recommend reviewing this PR commit-by-commit; each commit is self-contained
and should be easy to review at a glance.
- style-guide: Move text about block vs visual indent to indentation section
- style-guide: Move and expand text about trailing commas
- style-guide: s/right-ward/rightward/
- style-guide: Consistently refer to rustfmt as `rustfmt`
- style-guide: Remove inaccurate statement about rustfmt
- style-guide: Define (and capitalize) "ASCIIbetically"
- style-guide: Update cargo.md for authors being optional and not recommended
- style-guide: Avoid normative recommendations for formatting tool configurability
- style-guide: Clarify advice on names matching keywords
- style-guide: Reword an awkwardly phrased recommendation (and fix a typo)
- style-guide: Rephrase a confusingly ordered, ambiguous sentence (and fix a typo)
- style-guide: Avoid hyphenating "semicolon"
- style-guide: Make link text in SUMMARY.md match the headings in the linked pages
- style-guide: Define what an item is
- style-guide: Avoid referring to the style team in the past tense
slice::from_raw_parts: mention no-wrap-around condition
Cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/83996. This probably needs to be mentioned in more places, so I am not closing that issue, but this here should help at least.
Don't structurally resolve during method ambiguity in probe
See comment in UI test for reason for the failure. This is all on the error path anyways, not really sure what the assertion is there to achieve anyways...
Fixes#111739
When a trait is used without specifying the implementation (e.g. calling
a non-member associated function without fully-qualified syntax) and
there are multiple implementations available, use a placeholder comment
for the implementation type in the suggestion instead of picking a
random implementation.
Example:
```
fn main() {
let _ = Default::default();
}
```
Previous output:
```
error[E0790]: cannot call associated function on trait without specifying the corresponding `impl` type
--> test.rs:2:13
|
2 | let _ = Default::default();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot call associated function of trait
|
help: use a fully-qualified path to a specific available implementation (273 found)
|
2 | let _ = <FileTimes as Default>::default();
| +++++++++++++ +
```
New output:
```
error[E0790]: cannot call associated function on trait without specifying the corresponding `impl` type
--> test.rs:2:13
|
2 | let _ = Default::default();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ cannot call associated function of trait
|
help: use a fully-qualified path to a specific available implementation (273 found)
|
2 | let _ = </* self type */ as Default>::default();
| +++++++++++++++++++ +
```
Make it clear that the style guide saying "must" doesn't forbid
developers from doing differently (as though any power on this Earth
could do that) and doesn't forbid tools from allowing any particular
configuration options.
This sentence had a parenthetical without a closing parenthesis, and had
the phrase "which doesn't require special formatting" ambiguously at the
end of a list when it only applied to the last item of the list.
rustfmt does include a mechanism to distinguish standard library
imports, which it does syntactically by crate name. Avoid making a
misleading statement that implies it cannot do this.
