The previous behaviour of using the smallest type possible caused LLVM
to treat padding too conservatively, causing poor codegen. This commit
changes the behaviour to use an alignment-sized integer as the
discriminant. This keeps types the same size, but helps LLVM understand
the data structure a little better, resulting in better codegen.
The previous behaviour of using the smallest type possible caused LLVM
to treat padding too conservatively, causing poor codegen. This commit
changes the behaviour to use an type-alignment-sized integer as the
discriminant. This keeps types the same size, but helps LLVM understand
the data structure a little better, resulting in better codegen.
post-unboxed-closure-conversion. This requires a fair amount of
annoying coercions because all the `map` etc types are defined
generically over the `F`, so the automatic coercions don't propagate;
this is compounded by the need to use `let` and not `as` due to
stage0. That said, this pattern is to a large extent temporary and
unusual.
Back when for-loop iteration variables were just de-sugared into `let` bindings, debuginfo for them was created like for any other `let` binding. When the implementation approach for for-loops changed, we ceased having debuginfo for the iteration variable. This PR fixes this omission and adds a more prominent test case for it.
Also contains some minor, general cleanup of the debuginfo module.
Fixes#19732
#16081 fixed an issue where a nested return statement would cause incorrect behaviour due to the inner return writing over the return stack slot that had already been written too. However, the check was very broad and picked many cases that wouldn't ever be affected by this issue.
As a result, the number of allocas increased dramatically and therefore stack-size increased. LLVM is not able to remove all of the extraneous allocas. Any code that had multiple return values in a compound expression at the end of a function (including loops) would be hit by the issue.
The check now uses a control-flow graph to only consider the case when the inner return is executed conditionally. By itself, this narrowed definition causes #15763 to return, so the control-flow graph is also used to avoid passing the return slot as a destination when the result won't be used.
This change allows the stack-size of the main rustc task to be reduced to 8MB from 32MB.
followed by a semicolon.
This allows code like `vec![1i, 2, 3].len();` to work.
This breaks code that uses macros as statements without putting
semicolons after them, such as:
fn main() {
...
assert!(a == b)
assert!(c == d)
println(...);
}
It also breaks code that uses macros as items without semicolons:
local_data_key!(foo)
fn main() {
println("hello world")
}
Add semicolons to fix this code. Those two examples can be fixed as
follows:
fn main() {
...
assert!(a == b);
assert!(c == d);
println(...);
}
local_data_key!(foo);
fn main() {
println("hello world")
}
RFC #378.
Closes#18635.
[breaking-change]
This narrows the definition of nested returns such that only when the
outer return has a chance of being executed (due to the inner return
being conditional) do we mark the function as having nested returns.
Fixes#19684
per rfc 459
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/19390
One question is: should we start by warning, and only switch to hard error later? I think we discussed something like this in the meeting.
r? @alexcrichton
- The following operator traits now take their arguments by value: `Add`, `Sub`, `Mul`, `Div`, `Rem`, `BitAnd`, `BitOr`, `BitXor`, `Shl`, `Shr`. This breaks all existing implementations of these traits.
- The binary operation `a OP b` now "desugars" to `OpTrait::op_method(a, b)` and consumes both arguments.
- `String` and `Vec` addition have been changed to reuse the LHS owned value, and to avoid internal cloning. Only the following asymmetric operations are available: `String + &str` and `Vec<T> + &[T]`, which are now a short-hand for the "append" operation.
[breaking-change]
---
This passes `make check` locally. I haven't touch the unary operators in this PR, but converting them to by value should be very similar to this PR. I can work on them after this gets the thumbs up.
@nikomatsakis r? the compiler changes
@aturon r? the library changes. I think the only controversial bit is the semantic change of the `Vec`/`String` `Add` implementation.
cc #19148
