Tidy is not the right place to do this. Tidy is for running lints.
We should instead be running the lexer/grammar tests as part of the test
suite.
This may fix nightly breakage, but I don't know why.
To resume stack unwinding, the LLVM `resume` instruction must be used.
In order to use this instruction, the calling function must have an
exception handling personality set.
LLVM 4.0 adds a new IR validation check to ensure a personality is
always set in these cases.
This was introduced in [r277360](https://reviews.llvm.org/rL277360).
Improvements to the #[should_panic] feature
Add more error checking for the `#[should_panic]` attribute, and print the expected panic string when it does not match.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/29000
Eg:
```running 3 tests
test test2 ... ok
test test1 ... FAILED
: Panic did not include expected string 'foo'
test test3 ... FAILED
failures:
---- test1 stdout ----
thread 'test1' panicked at 'bar', test.rs:7
note: Run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` for a backtrace.
---- test3 stdout ----
thread 'test3' panicked at 'bar', test.rs:18
```
The problem occured due to lines like
```
3400;<CJK Ideograph Extension A, First>;Lo;0;L;;;;;N;;;;;
4DB5;<CJK Ideograph Extension A, Last>;Lo;0;L;;;;;N;;;;;
```
in `UnicodeData.txt`, which the script previously interpreted as two
characters, although it represents the whole range.
Fixes#34318.
rustbuild: Allow configuration of python interpreter
Add a configuration key to `config.toml`, read it from `./configure`, and add
auto-detection if none of those were specified.
Closes#35760
rustdoc: add cli argument `--playground-url`
Add a new cli argument `--playground-url` for rustdoc:
`rustdoc lib.rs --playground-url="https://play.rust-lang.org/"`
`rustdoc book.md --playground-url="https://play.rust-lang.org/"`
This makes it possible for tools like https://docs.rs to generate crate docs that can submit samples code to run at https://play.rust-lang.org, even if the crate's author *forgot* putting `#![doc(html_playground_url = "https://play.rust-lang.org/")]` to crate root. By the way, I'd like to say, many crate authors are not aware of existing of `#![doc(html_playground_url = "https://play.rust-lang.org/")]`.
`--playground-url` may be reset by `--markdown-playground-url` or `#![doc(html_playground_url=...)]`, so it's backward compatible.
@alexcrichton since you implemented playground-url related features.
There are now four static/shared scenarios that can happen for the
supported LLVM versions:
- 3.9+: By default use `llvm-config --link-static`
- 3.9+ and `--enable-llvm-link-shared`: Use `--link-shared` instead.
- 3.8: Use `llvm-config --shared-mode` and go with its answer.
- 3.7: Just assume static, maintaining the status quo.
Separate impl items from the parent impl
This change separates impl item bodies out of the impl itself. This gives incremental more resolution. In so doing, it refactors how the visitors work, and cleans up a bit of the collect/check logic (mostly by moving things out of collect that didn't really belong there, because they were just checking conditions).
However, this is not as effective as I expected, for a kind of frustrating reason. In particular, when invoking `foo.bar()` you still wind up with dependencies on private items. The problem is that the method resolution code scans that list for methods with the name `bar` -- and this winds up touching *all* the methods, even private ones.
I can imagine two obvious ways to fix this:
- separating fn bodies from fn sigs (#35078, currently being pursued by @flodiebold)
- a more aggressive model of incremental that @michaelwoerister has been advocating, in which we hash the intermediate results (e.g., the outputs of collect) so that we can see that the intermediate result hasn't changed, even if a particular impl item has changed.
So all in all I'm not quite sure whether to land this or not. =) It still seems like it has to be a win in some cases, but not with the test cases we have just now. I can try to gin up some test cases, but I'm not sure if they will be totally realistic. On the other hand, some of the early refactorings to the visitor trait seem worthwhile to me regardless.
cc #36349 -- well, this is basically a fix for that issue, I guess
r? @michaelwoerister
NB: Based atop of @eddyb's PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/37402; don't land until that lands.
Improved error reporting when target sysroot is missing.
Attempts to resolve#37131.
This is my first pull request on rust, so I would greatly appreciate any feedback you have on this.
Thanks!
The librustc_llvm API remains mostly unchanged, except that llvm::Attribute is no longer a bitflag but represents only a *single* attribute.
The ability to store many attributes in a small number of bits and modify them without interacting with LLVM is only used in rustc_trans::abi and closely related modules, and only attributes for function arguments are considered there.
Thus rustc_trans::abi now has its own bit-packed representation of argument attributes, which are translated to rustc_llvm::Attribute when applying the attributes.
Before, when we created an AssociatedItem for impl item X, we would read
the impl item itself. Now we instead load up the impl I that contains X
and read the data from the `ImplItemRef` for X; actually, we do it for
all impl items in I pre-emptively.
This kills the last source of edges between a method X and a call to a
method Y defined in the same impl.
Fixes#37121
add test for #37765
Adds a test for #37765, a path parsing fix which removes the need for a parenthesis workaround.
Closes#37765.
cc #37290 @withoutboats
r? @petrochenkov
Add semicolon to "perhaps add a `use` for one of them" help
Similar to pull request #37430, this makes the message more copy-paste
friendly and aligns it with other messages like:
help: you can import it into scope: use foo::Bar;
r? @eddyb
coherence: skip impls with an erroneous trait ref
Impls with a erroneous trait ref are already ignored in the first part
of coherence, so ignore them in the second part too. This avoids
cascading coherence errors when 1 impl of a trait has an error.
r? @nikomatsakis
Peekable must remember if a None has been seen in the `.peek()` method.
It ensures that `.peek(); .peek();` or `.peek(); .next();` only advances the
underlying iterator at most once. This does not by itself make the iterator
fused.
