This allows compiling entire crates from memory or preprocessing source files before they are tokenized.
Minor API refactoring included, which is a [breaking-change] for libsyntax users:
* `ParseSess::{next_node_id, reserve_node_ids}` moved to rustc's `Session`
* `new_parse_sess` -> `ParseSess::new`
* `new_parse_sess_special_handler` -> `ParseSess::with_span_handler`
* `mk_span_handler` -> `SpanHandler::new`
* `default_handler` -> `Handler::new`
* `mk_handler` -> `Handler::with_emitter`
* `string_to_filemap(sess source, path)` -> `sess.codemap().new_filemap(path, source)`
It is currently broken to use syntax such as `<T as Foo>::U::static_method()` where `<T as Foo>::U` is an associated type. I was able to fix this and simplify the parser a bit at the same time.
This also fixes the corresponding issue with associated types (#22139), but that's somewhat irrelevant because #22519 is still open, so this syntax still causes an error in type checking.
Similarly, although this fix applies to associated consts, #25046 forbids associated constants from using type parameters or `Self`, while #19559 means that associated types have to always have one of those two. Therefore, I think that you can't use an associated const from an associated type anyway.
There were still some mentions of `~[T]` and `~T`, mostly in comments and debugging statements. I tried to do my best to preserve meaning, but I might have gotten some wrong-- I'm happy to fix anything :)
I've found that there are still huge amounts of occurrences of `task`s in the documentation. This PR tries to eliminate all of them in favor of `thread`.
An automated script was run against the `.rs` and `.md` files,
subsituting every occurrence of `task` with `thread`. In the `.rs`
files, only the texts in the comment blocks were affected.
There are two interesting kinds of breakage illustrated here:
1. `Box<Trait>` in many contexts is treated as `Box<Trait + 'static>`,
due to [RFC 599]. However, in a type like `&'a Box<Trait>`, the
`Box<Trait>` type will be expanded to `Box<Trait + 'a>`, again due
to [RFC 599]. This, combined with the fix to Issue 25199, leads to
a borrowck problem due the combination of this function signature
(in src/libstd/net/parser.rs):
```rust
fn read_or<T>(&mut self, parsers: &mut [Box<FnMut(&mut Parser) -> Option<T>>]) -> Option<T>;
```
with this call site (again in src/libstd/net/parser.rs):
```rust
fn read_ip_addr(&mut self) -> Option<IpAddr> {
let ipv4_addr = |p: &mut Parser| p.read_ipv4_addr().map(|v4| IpAddr::V4(v4));
let ipv6_addr = |p: &mut Parser| p.read_ipv6_addr().map(|v6| IpAddr::V6(v6));
self.read_or(&mut [Box::new(ipv4_addr), Box::new(ipv6_addr)])
}
```
yielding borrowck errors like:
```
parser.rs:265:27: 265:69 error: borrowed value does not live long enough
parser.rs:265 self.read_or(&mut [Box::new(ipv4_addr), Box::new(ipv6_addr)])
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
```
(full log at: https://gist.github.com/pnkfelix/e2e80f1a71580f5d3103 )
The issue here is perhaps subtle: the `parsers` argument is
inferred to be taking a slice of boxed objects with the implicit
lifetime bound attached to the `self` parameter to `read_or`.
Meanwhile, the fix to Issue 25199 (added in a forth-coming commit)
is forcing us to assume that each boxed object may have a
destructor that could refer to state of that lifetime, and
*therefore* that inferred lifetime is required to outlive the boxed
object itself.
In this case, the relevant boxed object here is not going to make
any such references; I believe it is just an artifact of how the
expression was built that it is not assigned type:
`Box<FnMut(&mut Parser) -> Option<T> + 'static>`.
(i.e., mucking with the expression is probably one way to fix this
problem).
But the other way to fix it, adopted here, is to change the
`read_or` method type to force make the (presumably-intended)
`'static` bound explicit on the boxed `FnMut` object.
(Note: this is still just the *first* example of breakage.)
2. In `macro_rules.rs`, the `TTMacroExpander` trait defines a method
with signature:
```rust
fn expand<'cx>(&self, cx: &'cx mut ExtCtxt, ...) -> Box<MacResult+'cx>;
```
taking a `&'cx mut ExtCtxt` as an argument and returning a
`Box<MacResult'cx>`.
The fix to Issue 25199 (added in aforementioned forth-coming
commit) assumes that a value of type `Box<MacResult+'cx>` may, in
its destructor, refer to a reference of lifetime `'cx`; thus the
`'cx` lifetime is forced to outlive the returned value.
Meanwhile, within `expand.rs`, the old code was doing:
```rust
match expander.expand(fld.cx, ...).make_pat() { ... => immutable borrow of fld.cx ... }
```
The problem is that the `'cx` lifetime, inferred for the
`expander.expand` call, has now been extended so that it has to
outlive the temporary R-value returned by `expanded.expand`. But
call is also reborrowing `fld.cx` *mutably*, which means that this
reborrow must end before any immutable borrow of `fld.cx`; but
there is one of those within the match body. (Note that the
temporary R-values for the input expression to `match` all live as
long as the whole `match` expression itself (see Issue #3511 and PR
#11585).
To address this, I moved the construction of the pat value into its
own `let`-statement, so that the `Box<MacResult>` will only live
for as long as the initializing expression for the `let`-statement,
and thus allow the subsequent immutable borrow within the `match`.
[RFC 599]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0599-default-object-bound.md
Guard against overflow in `codemap::span_to_lines`.
(Revised/expanded version of PR #24976)
Make `span_to_lines` to return a `Result`.
In `diagnostic`, catch `Err` from `span_to_lines` and print `"(unprintable span)"` instead.
----
There a number of recent issues that report the bug here. See e.g. #24761 and #24954.
This change *might* fix them. However, that is *not* its main goal. The main goals are:
1. Make it possible for callers to recover from an error here, and
2. Insert a more conservative check, in that we are also checking that the files match up.
----
As a drive-by, fix#24997 , which was causing my attempts to `make check-stage1` on an `--enable-debug` build to fail.
Make `span_to_lines` to return a `Result`.
(This is better than just asserting internally, since it allows caller
to decide if they can recover from the problem.)
Added type alias for `FileLinesResult` returned by `span_to_lines`.
Update embedded unit test to reflect `span_to_lines` signature change.
In diagnostic, catch `Err` from `span_to_lines` and print
`"(internal compiler error: unprintable span)"` instead.
----
There a number of recent issues that report the bug here. See
e.g. #24761 and #24954.
This change *might* fix them. However, that is not its main goal.
The main goals are:
1. Make it possible for callers to recover from an error here, and
2. Insert a more conservative check, in that we are
also checking that the files match up.
Adds an `attrs` field to `FieldInfo` which lets one check the attributes on
a field whilst expanding.
This lets deriving plugins be more robust, for example providing the ability to
"ignore" a field for the purpose of deriving, or perhaps handle the field a
different way.
r? @huonw
collections: Implement String::drain(range) according to RFC 574
`.drain(range)` is unstable and under feature(collections_drain).
This adds a safe way to remove any range of a String as efficiently as
possible.
As noted in the code, this drain iterator has none of the memory safety
issues of the vector version.
RFC tracking issue is #23055
Hi! While researching stuff for the reference and the grammar, I came across a few mentions of using the `priv` keyword that was removed in 0.11.0 (#13547, #8122, rust-lang/rfcs#26, [RFC 0026](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0026-remove-priv.md)).
One occurrence is a mention in the reference, a few are in comments, and a few are marking test functions. I left the test that makes sure you can't name an ident `priv` since it's still a reserved keyword. I did a little grepping around for `priv `, priv in backticks, `Private` etc and I think the remaining instances are fine, but if anyone knows anywhere in particular I should check for any other lingering mentions of `priv`, please let me know and I would be happy to! 🍂🌊
