fix: fix ICE in `custom-test-frameworks` feature
Fixes#107454
Simple fix to emit error instead of ICEing. At some point, all the code in `tests.rs` should be refactored, there is a bit of duplication (this PR's code is repeated five times over lol).
r? `@Nilstrieb` (active on the linked issue?)
Originally, this was kinda half-allowed. There were some primitive
checks in place that looked at the span to see whether the input was
likely a literal. These "source literal" checks are needed because the
spans created during `format_args` parsing only make sense when it is
indeed a literal that was written in the source code directly.
This is orthogonal to the restriction that the first argument must be a
"direct literal", not being exanpanded from macros. This restriction was
imposed by [RFC 2795] on the basis of being too confusing. But this was
only concerned with the argument of the invocation being a literal, not
whether it was a source literal (maybe in spirit it meant it being a
source literal, this is not clear to me).
Since the original check only really cared about source literals (which
is good enough to deny the `format_args!(concat!())` example), macros
expanding to `format_args` invocations were able to use implicit
captures if they spanned the string in a way that lead back to a source
string.
The "source literal" checks were not strict enough and caused ICEs in
certain cases (see # 106191 (the space is intended to avoid spammy
backreferences)). So I tightened it up in # 106195 to really only work
if it's a direct source literal.
This caused the `indoc` crate to break. `indoc` transformed the source
literal by removing whitespace, which made it not a "source literal"
anymore (which is required to fix the ICE). But since `indoc` spanned
the literal in ways that made the old check think that it's a literal,
it was able to use implicit captures (which is useful and nice for the
users of `indoc`).
This commit properly seperates the previously introduced concepts of
"source literal" and "direct literal" and therefore allows `indoc`
invocations, which don't create "source literals" to use implicit
captures again.
[RFC 2795]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2795-format-args-implicit-identifiers.html#macro-hygiene
tidy: enforce comment blocks to have an even number of backticks
After PR #108694, most unmatched backticks in `compiler/` comments have been eliminated. This PR adds a tidy lint to ensure no new unmatched backticks are added, and either addresses the lint in the remaining instances it found, or allows it.
Very often, backtick containing sections wrap around lines, for example:
```Rust
// This function takes a tuple `(Vec<String>,
// Box<[u8]>)` and transforms it into `Vec<u8>`.
```
The lint is implemented to work on top of blocks, counting each line with a `//` into a block, and counting if there are an odd or even number of backticks in the entire block, instead of looking at just a single line.
This makes it easier to open the messages file while developing on features.
The commit was the result of automatted changes:
for p in compiler/rustc_*; do mv $p/locales/en-US.ftl $p/messages.ftl; rmdir $p/locales; done
for p in compiler/rustc_*; do sed -i "s#\.\./locales/en-US.ftl#../messages.ftl#" $p/src/lib.rs; done
allow negative numeric literals in `concat!`
Fixes#106837
While *technically* negative numeric literals are implemented as unary operations, users can reasonably expect that negative literals are treated the same as positive literals.
Relax ordering rules for `asm!` operands
The `asm!` and `global_asm!` macros require their operands to appear strictly in the following order:
- Template strings
- Positional operands
- Named operands
- Explicit register operands
- `clobber_abi`
- `options`
This is overly strict and can be inconvienent when building complex `asm!` statements with macros. This PR relaxes the ordering requirements as follows:
- Template strings must still come before all other operands.
- Positional operands must still come before named and explicit register operands.
- Named and explicit register operands can be freely mixed.
- `options` and `clobber_abi` can appear in any position after the template strings.
r? ```````@joshtriplett```````
This resolves an inconsistency in naming style for functions
on the parser, between functions parsing specific kinds of items
and those for expressions, favoring the parse_item_[sth] style
used by functions for items. There are multiple advantages
of that style:
* functions of both categories are collected in the same place
in the rustdoc output.
* it helps with autocompletion, as you can narrow down your
search for a function to those about expressions.
* it mirrors rust's path syntax where less specific things
come first, then it gets more specific, i.e.
std::collections::hash_map::Entry
The disadvantage is that it doesn't "read like a sentence"
any more, but I think the advantages weigh more greatly.
This change was mostly application of this command:
sed -i -E 's/(fn |\.)parse_([[:alnum:]_]+)_expr/\1parse_expr_\2/' compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/*.rs
Plus very minor fixes outside of rustc_parse, and an invocation
of x fmt.
Instead of loading the Fluent resources for every crate in
`rustc_error_messages`, each crate generates typed identifiers for its
own diagnostics and creates a static which are pulled together in the
`rustc_driver` crate and provided to the diagnostic emitter.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
If you do `derive(PartialEq)` on a packed struct, the output shown by
`-Zunpretty=expanded` includes expressions like this:
```
{ self.x } == { other.x }
```
This is invalid syntax. This doesn't break compilation, because the AST
nodes are constructed within the compiler. But it does mean anyone using
`-Zunpretty=expanded` output as a guide for hand-written impls could get
a nasty surprise.
This commit fixes things by instead using this form:
```
({ self.x }) == ({ other.x })
```
Currently, deriving on packed structs has some non-trivial limitations,
related to the fact that taking references on unaligned fields is UB.
The current approach to field accesses in derived code:
- Normal case: `&self.0`
- In a packed struct that derives `Copy`: `&{self.0}`
- In a packed struct that doesn't derive `Copy`: `&self.0`
Plus, we disallow deriving any builtin traits other than `Default` for any
packed generic type, because it's possible that there might be
misaligned fields. This is a fairly broad restriction.
Plus, we disallow deriving any builtin traits other than `Default` for most
packed types that don't derive `Copy`. (The exceptions are those where the
alignments inherently satisfy the packing, e.g. in a type with
`repr(packed(N))` where all the fields have alignments of `N` or less
anyway. Such types are pretty strange, because the `packed` attribute is
not having any effect.)
This commit introduces a new, simpler approach to field accesses:
- Normal case: `&self.0`
- In a packed struct: `&{self.0}`
In the latter case, this requires that all fields impl `Copy`, which is
a new restriction. This means that the following example compiles under
the old approach and doesn't compile under the new approach.
```
#[derive(Debug)]
struct NonCopy(u8);
#[derive(Debug)
#[repr(packed)]
struct MyType(NonCopy);
```
(Note that the old approach's support for cases like this was brittle.
Changing the `u8` to a `u16` would be enough to stop it working. So not
much capability is lost here.)
However, the other constraints from the old rules are removed. We can now
derive builtin traits for packed generic structs like this:
```
trait Trait { type A; }
#[derive(Hash)]
#[repr(packed)]
pub struct Foo<T: Trait>(T, T::A);
```
To allow this, we add a `T: Copy` bound in the derived impl and a `T::A:
Copy` bound in where clauses. So `T` and `T::A` must impl `Copy`.
We can now also derive builtin traits for packed structs that don't derive
`Copy`, so long as the fields impl `Copy`:
```
#[derive(Hash)]
#[repr(packed)]
pub struct Foo(u32);
```
This includes types that hand-impl `Copy` rather than deriving it, such as the
following, that show up in winapi-0.2:
```
#[derive(Clone)]
#[repr(packed)]
struct MyType(i32);
impl Copy for MyType {}
```
The new approach is simpler to understand and implement, and it avoids
the need for the `unsafe_derive_on_repr_packed` check.
One exception is required for backwards-compatibility: we allow `[u8]`
fields for now. There is a new lint for this,
`byte_slice_in_packed_struct_with_derive`.
Special-case deriving `PartialOrd` for enums with dataless variants
I was able to get slightly better codegen by flipping the derived `PartialOrd` logic for two-variant enums. I also tried to document the implementation of the derive macro to make the special-case logic a little clearer.
```rs
#[derive(PartialEq, PartialOrd)]
pub enum A<T> {
A,
B(T)
}
```
```diff
impl<T: ::core::cmp::PartialOrd> ::core::cmp::PartialOrd for A<T> {
#[inline]
fn partial_cmp(
&self,
other: &A<T>,
) -> ::core::option::Option<::core::cmp::Ordering> {
let __self_tag = ::core::intrinsics::discriminant_value(self);
let __arg1_tag = ::core::intrinsics::discriminant_value(other);
- match ::core::cmp::PartialOrd::partial_cmp(&__self_tag, &__arg1_tag) {
- ::core::option::Option::Some(::core::cmp::Ordering::Equal) => {
- match (self, other) {
- (A::B(__self_0), A::B(__arg1_0)) => {
- ::core::cmp::PartialOrd::partial_cmp(__self_0, __arg1_0)
- }
- _ => ::core::option::Option::Some(::core::cmp::Ordering::Equal),
- }
+ match (self, other) {
+ (A::B(__self_0), A::B(__arg1_0)) => {
+ ::core::cmp::PartialOrd::partial_cmp(__self_0, __arg1_0)
}
- cmp => cmp,
+ _ => ::core::cmp::PartialOrd::partial_cmp(&__self_tag, &__arg1_tag),
}
}
}
```
Godbolt: [Current](https://godbolt.org/z/GYjEzG1T8), [New](https://godbolt.org/z/GoK78qx15)
I'm not sure how common a case comparing two enums like this (such as `Option`) is, and if it's worth the slowdown of adding a special case to the derive. If it causes overall regressions it might be worth just manually implementing this for `Option`.
The `asm!` and `global_asm!` macros require their operands to appear
strictly in the following order:
- Template strings
- Positional operands
- Named operands
- Explicit register operands
- `clobber_abi`
- `options`
This is overly strict and can be inconvienent when building complex
`asm!` statements with macros. This PR relaxes the ordering requirements
as follows:
- Template strings must still come before all other operands.
- Positional operands must still come before named and explicit register
operands.
- Named and explicit register operands can be freely mixed.
- `options` and `clobber_abi` can appear in any position.
Move format_args!() into AST (and expand it during AST lowering)
Implements https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/541
This moves FormatArgs from rustc_builtin_macros to rustc_ast_lowering. For now, the end result is the same. But this allows for future changes to do smarter things with format_args!(). It also allows Clippy to directly access the ast::FormatArgs, making things a lot easier.
This change turns the format args types into lang items. The builtin macro used to refer to them by their path. After this change, the path is no longer relevant, making it easier to make changes in `core`.
This updates clippy to use the new language items, but this doesn't yet make clippy use the ast::FormatArgs structure that's now available. That should be done after this is merged.
Mark `proc_macro_decls_static` as always used
This would have avoided a bug in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/104860.
In practice this shouldn't matter since nothing uses the query other than the `dead_code` lint, but this isn't documented as an internal-only query so it seems nice for it to be accurate. I think for `dead_code` it doesn't matter because the relevant code is generated by `rustc_builtin_macros` and isn't linted.
I think `@tmiasko` or `@bjorn3` would be a good reviewer?
r? `@tmiasko`
This would have avoided a bug in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/104860.
In practice this shouldn't matter since nothing uses the query other than the `dead_code` lint,
but this isn't documented as an internal-only query so it seems nice for it to be accurate.
I think for `dead_code` it doesn't matter because the relevant code is generated by `rustc_builtin_macros` and isn't linted.
