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 `?`.
There are a few places were we have to construct it, though, and a few
places that are more invasive to change. To do this, we create a
constructor with a long obvious name.
Improve `expect` impl and handle `#[expect(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` (RFC 2383)
This PR updates unstable `ExpectationIds` in stashed diagnostics and adds some asserts to ensure that the stored expectations are really empty in the end. Additionally, it handles the `#[expect(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` case.
According to the [Errors and lints docs](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/diagnostics.html#diagnostic-levels) the `error` level should only be used _"when the compiler detects a problem that makes it unable to compile the program"_. As this isn't the case with `#[expect(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` I decided to only create a warning. To avoid adding a new lint only for this case, I simply emit a `unfulfilled_lint_expectations` diagnostic with an additional note.
---
r? `@wesleywiser` I'm requesting a review from you since you reviewed the previous PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87835. You are welcome to reassign it if you're busy 🙃
rfc: [RFC-2383](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html)
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85549
cc: `@flip1995` In case you're also interested in this :)
This updates the standard library's documentation to use the new syntax. The
documentation is worthwhile to update as it should be more idiomatic
(particularly for features like this, which are nice for users to get acquainted
with). The general codebase is likely more hassle than benefit to update: it'll
hurt git blame, and generally updates can be done by folks updating the code if
(and when) that makes things more readable with the new format.
A few places in the compiler and library code are updated (mostly just due to
already having been done when this commit was first authored).
Implementation of the `expect` attribute (RFC 2383)
This is an implementation of the `expect` attribute as described in [RFC-2383](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2383-lint-reasons.html). The attribute allows the suppression of lint message by expecting them. Unfulfilled lint expectations (meaning no expected lint was caught) will emit the `unfulfilled_lint_expectations` lint at the `expect` attribute.
### Example
#### input
```rs
// required feature flag
#![feature(lint_reasons)]
#[expect(unused_mut)] // Will warn about an unfulfilled expectation
#[expect(unused_variables)] // Will be fulfilled by x
fn main() {
let x = 0;
}
```
#### output
```txt
warning: this lint expectation is unfulfilled
--> $DIR/trigger_lint.rs:3:1
|
LL | #[expect(unused_mut)] // Will warn about an unfulfilled expectation
| ^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `#[warn(unfulfilled_lint_expectations)]` on by default
```
### Implementation
This implementation introduces `Expect` as a new lint level for diagnostics, which have been expected. All lint expectations marked via the `expect` attribute are collected in the [`LintLevelsBuilder`] and assigned an ID that is stored in the new lint level. The `LintLevelsBuilder` stores all found expectations and the data needed to emit the `unfulfilled_lint_expectations` in the [`LintLevelsMap`] which is the result of the [`lint_levels()`] query.
The [`rustc_errors::HandlerInner`] is the central error handler in rustc and handles the emission of all diagnostics. Lint message with the level `Expect` are suppressed during this emission, while the expectation ID is stored in a set which marks them as fulfilled. The last step is then so simply check if all expectations collected by the [`LintLevelsBuilder`] in the [`LintLevelsMap`] have been marked as fulfilled in the [`rustc_errors::HandlerInner`]. Otherwise, a new lint message will be emitted.
The implementation of the `LintExpectationId` required some special handling to make it stable between sessions. Lints can be emitted during [`EarlyLintPass`]es. At this stage, it's not possible to create a stable identifier. The level instead stores an unstable identifier, which is later converted to a stable `LintExpectationId`.
### Followup TO-DOs
All open TO-DOs have been marked with `FIXME` comments in the code. This is the combined list of them:
* [ ] The current implementation doesn't cover cases where the `unfulfilled_lint_expectations` lint is actually expected by another `expect` attribute.
* This should be easily possible, but I wanted to get some feedback before putting more work into this.
* This could also be done in a new PR to not add to much more code to this one
* [ ] Update unstable documentation to reflect this change.
* [ ] Update unstable expectation ids in [`HandlerInner::stashed_diagnostics`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_errors/struct.HandlerInner.html#structfield.stashed_diagnostics)
### Open questions
I also have a few open questions where I would like to get feedback on:
1. The RFC discussion included a suggestion to change the `expect` attribute to something else. (Initiated by `@Ixrec` [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2383#issuecomment-378424091), suggestion from `@scottmcm` to use `#[should_lint(...)]` [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2383#issuecomment-378648877)). No real conclusion was drawn on that point from my understanding. Is this still open for discussion, or was this discarded with the merge of the RFC?
2. How should the expect attribute deal with the new `force-warn` lint level?
---
This approach was inspired by a discussion with `@LeSeulArtichaut.`
RFC tracking issue: #54503
Mentoring/Implementation issue: #85549
[`LintLevelsBuilder`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_lint/levels/struct.LintLevelsBuilder.html
[`LintLevelsMap`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/lint/struct.LintLevelMap.html
[`lint_levels()`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/context/struct.TyCtxt.html#method.lint_levels
[`rustc_errors::HandlerInner`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_errors/struct.HandlerInner.html
[`EarlyLintPass`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_lint/trait.EarlyLintPass.html
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.
rustc_errors: let `DiagnosticBuilder::emit` return a "guarantee of emission".
That is, `DiagnosticBuilder` is now generic over the return type of `.emit()`, so we'll now have:
* `DiagnosticBuilder<ErrorReported>` for error (incl. fatal/bug) diagnostics
* can only be created via a `const L: Level`-generic constructor, that limits allowed variants via a `where` clause, so not even `rustc_errors` can accidentally bypass this limitation
* asserts `diagnostic.is_error()` on emission, just in case the construction restriction was bypassed (e.g. by replacing the whole `Diagnostic` inside `DiagnosticBuilder`)
* `.emit()` returns `ErrorReported`, as a "proof" token that `.emit()` was called
(though note that this isn't a real guarantee until after completing the work on
#69426)
* `DiagnosticBuilder<()>` for everything else (warnings, notes, etc.)
* can also be obtained from other `DiagnosticBuilder`s by calling `.forget_guarantee()`
This PR is a companion to other ongoing work, namely:
* #69426
and it's ongoing implementation:
#93222
the API changes in this PR are needed to get statically-checked "only errors produce `ErrorReported` from `.emit()`", but doesn't itself provide any really strong guarantees without those other `ErrorReported` changes
* #93244
would make the choices of API changes (esp. naming) in this PR fit better overall
In order to be able to let `.emit()` return anything trustable, several changes had to be made:
* `Diagnostic`'s `level` field is now private to `rustc_errors`, to disallow arbitrary "downgrade"s from "some kind of error" to "warning" (or anything else that doesn't cause compilation to fail)
* it's still possible to replace the whole `Diagnostic` inside the `DiagnosticBuilder`, sadly, that's harder to fix, but it's unlikely enough that we can paper over it with asserts on `.emit()`
* `.cancel()` now consumes `DiagnosticBuilder`, preventing `.emit()` calls on a cancelled diagnostic
* it's also now done internally, through `DiagnosticBuilder`-private state, instead of having a `Level::Cancelled` variant that can be read (or worse, written) by the user
* this removes a hazard of calling `.cancel()` on an error then continuing to attach details to it, and even expect to be able to `.emit()` it
* warnings were switched to *only* `can_emit_warnings` on emission (instead of pre-cancelling early)
* `struct_dummy` was removed (as it relied on a pre-`Cancelled` `Diagnostic`)
* since `.emit()` doesn't consume the `DiagnosticBuilder` <sub>(I tried and gave up, it's much more work than this PR)</sub>,
we have to make `.emit()` idempotent wrt the guarantees it returns
* thankfully, `err.emit(); err.emit();` can return `ErrorReported` both times, as the second `.emit()` call has no side-effects *only* because the first one did do the appropriate emission
* `&mut Diagnostic` is now used in a lot of function signatures, which used to take `&mut DiagnosticBuilder` (in the interest of not having to make those functions generic)
* the APIs were already mostly identical, allowing for low-effort porting to this new setup
* only some of the suggestion methods needed some rework, to have the extra `DiagnosticBuilder` functionality on the `Diagnostic` methods themselves (that change is also present in #93259)
* `.emit()`/`.cancel()` aren't available, but IMO calling them from an "error decorator/annotator" function isn't a good practice, and can lead to strange behavior (from the caller's perspective)
* `.downgrade_to_delayed_bug()` was added, letting you convert any `.is_error()` diagnostic into a `delay_span_bug` one (which works because in both cases the guarantees available are the same)
This PR should ideally be reviewed commit-by-commit, since there is a lot of fallout in each.
r? `@estebank` cc `@Manishearth` `@nikomatsakis` `@mark-i-m`
This is no longer used by the compiler itself, and removing this support opens
the door to massively simplifying the Decodable/Decoder API by dropping the
self-describing deserialization support (necessary for JSON).
`Decoder` has two impls:
- opaque: this impl is already partly infallible, i.e. in some places it
currently panics on failure (e.g. if the input is too short, or on a
bad `Result` discriminant), and in some places it returns an error
(e.g. on a bad `Option` discriminant). The number of places where
either happens is surprisingly small, just because the binary
representation has very little redundancy and a lot of input reading
can occur even on malformed data.
- json: this impl is fully fallible, but it's only used (a) for the
`.rlink` file production, and there's a `FIXME` comment suggesting it
should change to a binary format, and (b) in a few tests in
non-fundamental ways. Indeed #85993 is open to remove it entirely.
And the top-level places in the compiler that call into decoding just
abort on error anyway. So the fallibility is providing little value, and
getting rid of it leads to some non-trivial performance improvements.
Much of this commit is pretty boring and mechanical. Some notes about
a few interesting parts:
- The commit removes `Decoder::{Error,error}`.
- `InternIteratorElement::intern_with`: the impl for `T` now has the same
optimization for small counts that the impl for `Result<T, E>` has,
because it's now much hotter.
- Decodable impls for SmallVec, LinkedList, VecDeque now all use
`collect`, which is nice; the one for `Vec` uses unsafe code, because
that gave better perf on some benchmarks.
Replace usages of vec![].into_iter with [].into_iter
`[].into_iter` is idiomatic over `vec![].into_iter` because its simpler and faster (unless the vec is optimized away in which case it would be the same)
So we should change all the implementation, documentation and tests to use it.
I skipped:
* `src/tools` - Those are copied in from upstream
* `src/test/ui` - Hard to tell if `vec![].into_iter` was used intentionally or not here and not much benefit to changing it.
* any case where `vec![].into_iter` was used because we specifically needed a `Vec::IntoIter<T>`
* any case where it looked like we were intentionally using `vec![].into_iter` to test it.
Mak DefId to AccessLevel map in resolve for export
hir_id to accesslevel in resolve and applied in privacy
using local def id
removing tracing probes
making function not recursive and adding comments
Move most of Exported/Public res to rustc_resolve
moving public/export res to resolve
fix missing stability attributes in core, std and alloc
move code to access_levels.rs
return for some kinds instead of going through them
Export correctness, macro changes, comments
add comment for import binding
add comment for import binding
renmae to access level visitor, remove comments, move fn as closure, remove new_key
fmt
fix rebase
fix rebase
fmt
fmt
fix: move macro def to rustc_resolve
fix: reachable AccessLevel for enum variants
fmt
fix: missing stability attributes for other architectures
allow unreachable pub in rustfmt
fix: missing impl access level + renaming export to reexport
Missing impl access level was found thanks to a test in clippy
This was a regression from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87337;
the `panic_if_treat_err_as_bug` function only checked the number of hard
errors, not the number of lint errors.
