Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #70467 (Use `call` instead of `invoke` for functions that cannot unwind )
- #71070 (rustbuild: Remove stage 0 LLD flavor workaround for MSVC)
- #71167 (big-O notation: parenthesis for function calls, explicit multiplication)
- #71238 (Miri: fix typo)
- #71242 (Format Mailmap To Work With GitHub)
- #71243 (Account for use of `try!()` in 2018 edition and guide users in the right direction)
Failed merges:
r? @ghost
big-O notation: parenthesis for function calls, explicit multiplication
I saw `O(n m log n)` in the docs and found that really hard to parse. In particular, I don't think we should use blank space as syntax for *both* multiplication and function calls, that is just confusing.
This PR makes both multiplication and function calls explicit using Rust-like syntax. If you prefer, I can also leave one of them implicit, but I believe explicit is better here.
While I was at it I also added backticks consistently.
Use `call` instead of `invoke` for functions that cannot unwind
The `FnAbi` now knows if the function is allowed to unwind. If a
function isn't allowed to unwind, we can use a `call` instead of an
`invoke`.
This resolves an issue when calling LLVM intrinsics which cannot unwind
LLVM will generate an error if you attempt to invoke them so we need to
ignore cleanup blocks in codegen and generate a call instead.
Fixes#69911
r? @eddyb
cc @rust-lang/wg-ffi-unwind
This adds a hint on `mem::replace`, "if you don't need the old value,
you can just assign the new value directly". This is in similar spirit
to the `must_use` on `ManuallyDrop::take`.
Minor fix and addition to doc comments
1. Fixed doc comment of struct 'rustc_middle::mir::Location'
Currently, the general explanation of the struct appears at the field
explanation section. I moved and changed the doc comments slightly, so
that the general explanation would appear in the proper location in
docs.
2. Added doc comment explaining 'rustc_mir::util::pretty::write_mir_fn'
Unlike other counterparts, brief explanation for this function was missing,
so I added one.
Thank you for reviewing this PR :)
Implement `Clone` for `liballoc::collections::linked_list::Cursor`.
This implements `Clone` for linked list `Cursor`. Implementing `Copy` is also possible here, but i'm not sure whether i should also do it.
r? @Amanieu
Use query to determine whether function needs const checking
Resolves#69615.
The HIR const-checker was checking the `constness` of a function's `fn_sig` to determine whether a function needed const-checking. Now that const trait impls are a thing, this is no longer enough. All code should use the `is_const_fn_raw` query instead, which takes the constness of the impl block into account.
r? @oli-obk
1. Fixed doc comment of struct 'rustc_middle::mir::Location'
Currently, the general explanation of the struct appears at the field
explanation section. I moved and changed the doc comments slightly, so
that the general explanation would appear in the proper location in
docs.
2. Added doc comment explaining 'rustc_mir::util::pretty::write_mir_fn'
Unlike other counterparts, brief explanation for this function was missing,
so I added one.
Thank you for reviewing this PR :)
Add `ConstKind::Error` and convert `ErrorHandled::Reported` to it.
By replicating the `ty::Error` approach to encoding "an error has occurred", all of the mechanisms that skip redundant/downstream errors are engaged and help out (see the reduction in test output).
This PR also adds `ErrorHandled::Linted` for the lint case because using `ErrorHandled::Reported` *without* having emitted an error that is *guaranteed* to stop compilation, is incorrect now.
r? @oli-obk cc @rust-lang/wg-const-eval @varkor @yodaldevoid
Fix typo in Default trait docs: Provides -> Provide
An earlier commit (99ed06e) accidentally changed this paragraph from the original, imperative `Provide` to the present tense `Provides`. The latter is indeed the standard for Rustdoc comments relating to a function or method, but this snippet is introducing the `Default` trait in general terms and not talking about any particular function. I believe this change was likely made in error and should be reverted.
Dogfood or_patterns in the standard library
We can start using `or_patterns` in the standard library as a step toward stabilization.
cc #54883 @Centril
reword Miri validity errors: undefined -> uninitialized
I don't think we say "undefined value" or anything like that anywhere in the docs or so, but we do use the term "uninitialized memory", so I think we should do the same here.
Longer-term, I think we should also internally rename "undef" to "uninit".
r? @oli-obk
