Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #92076 (Ignore other `PredicateKind`s in rustdoc auto trait finder)
- #92219 (Remove VCVARS_BAT)
- #92238 (Add a test suite for stringify macro)
- #92330 (Add myself to .mailmap)
- #92333 (Tighten span when suggesting lifetime on path)
- #92335 (Document units for `std::column`)
- #92344 (⬆️ rust-analyzer)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Tighten span when suggesting lifetime on path
This is kind of a hack.
Really the issue here is that we want to suggest the segment's span if the path resolves to something defined outside of the macro, and the macro's span if it resolves to something defined within.. I'll look into seeing if we can do something like that.
Fixes#92324
r? `@cjgillot`
Add a test suite for stringify macro
This attempts to cover the behavior of `stringify!` on various interpolated syntax tree nodes.
The pretty printer has a history of unsightly whitespace (double spaces, missing spaces, spaces where there shouldn't be spaces) — #91437, #91562, #91568. There are several such issues left; the test cases that I consider to be currently behaving incorrectly are marked with `// FIXME` in the PR.
Remove VCVARS_BAT
This environment variable is no longer used. It was used in the original Azure Pipelines configuration (#60777). When GitHub Actions were added (#70190), it was no longer used, and I suspect it was just an oversight while transitioning the configuration.
Ignore other `PredicateKind`s in rustdoc auto trait finder
Fixes#92073
There's not really anything we can do with them, and they're
causing ICEs. I'm not using a wildcard match, as we should check
that any new `PredicateKind`s are handled properly by rustdoc.
rustc_metadata: Switch crate data iteration from a callback to iterator
The iteration looks more conventional this way, and some allocations are avoided.
intra-doc: Use an enum to represent URL fragments
This is a step in the direction of computing the links more lazily,
which I think will simplify the implementation of intra-doc links.
This will also make it easier to eventually use the actual `Res` for
associated items, enum variants, and fields, rather than their HTML
page's `Res`.
r? `@jyn514`
Now the only two crate-public items are `build_index` and
`get_index_search_type` (because for some reason the latter is also used
in `formats::cache`).
It was previously defined in `render::search_index` but wasn't used at
all there. `clean::types` seems like a better fit since that's where
`ExternalCrate` is defined.
This is a step in the direction of computing the links more lazily,
which I think will simplify the implementation of intra-doc links.
This will also make it easier to eventually use the actual `Res` for
associated items, enum variants, and fields, rather than their HTML
page's `Res`.
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #90586 (Relax priv-in-pub lint on generic bounds and where clauses of trait impls.)
- #92112 (Fix the error of checking `base_expr` twice in type_changing_struct_update)
- #92147 (rustc_builtin_macros: make asm mod public for rustfmt)
- #92161 (resolve: Minor miscellaneous cleanups from #89059)
- #92264 (Remove `maybe_uninit_extra` feature from Vec docs)
- #92303 (Add test cases for issue #26186)
- #92307 (Fix minor typos)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Add test cases for issue #26186Closes#26186
It seems that issue #26186 has been solved at some point since the issue has been last updated. I've merged together the examples that were supplied by `@Osspial,` `@Mark-Simulacrum,` `@Diggsey,` `@eefriedman` and `@shepmaster,` so that we can add this to the testing suite and prevent these issues from re-occurring.
Remove `maybe_uninit_extra` feature from Vec docs
In `Vec`, two doc tests are using `MaybeUninit::write` , stabilized in 1.55. This makes docs' usage of `maybe_uninit_extra` feature unnecessary.
Relax priv-in-pub lint on generic bounds and where clauses of trait impls.
The priv-in-pub lint is a legacy mechanism of the compiler, supplanted by a reachability-based [type privacy](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2145-type-privacy.md) analysis. This PR does **not** relax type privacy; it only relaxes the lint (as proposed by the type privacy RFC) in the case of trait impls.
## Current Behavior
On public trait impls, it's currently an **error** to have a `where` bound constraining a private type with a trait:
```rust
pub trait Trait {}
pub struct Type {}
struct Priv {}
impl Trait for Priv {}
impl Trait for Type
where
Priv: Trait // ERROR
{}
```
...and it's a **warning** to have have a public type constrained by a private trait:
```rust
pub trait Trait {}
pub struct Type {}
pub struct Pub {}
trait Priv {}
impl Priv for Pub {}
impl Trait for Type
where
Pub: Priv // WARNING
{}
```
This lint applies to `where` clauses in other contexts, too; e.g. on free functions:
```rust
struct Priv<T>(T);
pub trait Pub {}
impl<T: Pub> Pub for Priv<T> {}
pub fn function<T>()
where
Priv<T>: Pub // WARNING
{}
```
**These constraints could be relaxed without issue.**
## New Behavior
This lint is relaxed for `where` clauses on trait impls, such that it's okay to have a `where` bound constraining a private type with a trait:
```rust
pub trait Trait {}
pub struct Type {}
struct Priv {}
impl Trait for Priv {}
impl Trait for Type
where
Priv: Trait // OK
{}
```
...and it's okay to have a public type constrained by a private trait:
```rust
pub trait Trait {}
pub struct Type {}
pub struct Pub {}
trait Priv {}
impl Priv for Pub {}
impl Trait for Type
where
Pub: Priv // OK
{}
```
## Rationale
While the priv-in-pub lint is not essential for soundness, it *can* help programmers avoid pitfalls that would make their libraries difficult to use by others. For instance, such a lint *is* useful for free functions; e.g. if a downstream crate tries to call the `function` in the previous snippet in a generic context:
```rust
fn callsite<T>()
where
Priv<T>: Pub // ERROR: omitting this bound is a compile error, but including it is too
{
function::<T>()
}
```
...it cannot do so without repeating `function`'s `where` bound, which we cannot do because `Priv` is out-of-scope. A lint for this case is arguably helpful.
However, this same reasoning **doesn't** hold for trait impls. To call an unconstrained method on a public trait impl with private bounds, you don't need to forward those private bounds, you can forward the public trait:
```rust
mod upstream {
pub trait Trait {
fn method(&self) {}
}
pub struct Type<T>(T);
pub struct Pub<T>(T);
trait Priv {}
impl<T: Priv> Priv for Pub<T> {}
impl<T> Trait for Type<T>
where
Pub<T>: Priv // WARNING
{}
}
mod downstream {
use super::upstream::*;
fn function<T>(value: Type<T>)
where
Type<T>: Trait // <- no private deets!
{
value.method();
}
}
```
**This PR only eliminates the lint on trait impls.** It leaves it intact for all other contexts, including trait definitions, inherent impls, and function definitions. It doesn't need to exist in those cases either, but I figured I'd first target a case where it's mostly pointless.
## Other Notes
- See discussion [on zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/relax.20priv-in-pub.20lint.20for.20trait.20impl.20.60where.60.20bounds/near/222458397).
- This PR effectively reverts #79291.
Rustdoc: use `is_doc_hidden` method on more places
While profiling `rustdoc`, I noticed that finding out if some item is marked with `#[doc(hidden)]` is relatively hot, so I tried to optimize it.
I noticed that there is already a method called `is_doc_hidden` on `TyCtxt`, but it wasn't used much, so I replaced the manual calls to `attrs(...).has_word(...)` with this method. Just by doing that, perf. was improved locally, although I'm not sure if the semantics of the previous calls and this method are the same?
As another step, I tried to querify `is_doc_hidden`, but I didn't include that here until we see the perf. results from the first commit and until I find whether this change is OK at all :)
Can I ask for a perf. run? Thanks.
r? `@jyn514`
Do not display `~const Drop` in rustdoc
Although `T: ~const Drop` is still at an experimental stage, we have already begun inserting these bounds in libstd. This change hides them from rustdoc because 1. `~const` should not be documented in general as it is not yet official syntax; 2. users are not expected to know what `~const Drop` means yet.
