Implement the `!` type
This implements the never type (`!`) and hides it behind the feature gate `#[feature(never_type)]`. With the feature gate off, things should build as normal (although some error messages may be different). With the gate on, `!` is usable as a type and diverging type variables (ie. types that are unconstrained by anything in the code) will default to `!` instead of `()`.
Implementation of #34168
r? @brson
cc @alexcrichton
cc @steveklabnik
cc @jonathandturner
I only updated `librustc_privacy/diagnostics.rs`, and I already found a case where the code doesn't throw the expected error code (E0448).
Fixes#34168.
Add AST validation pass and move some checks to it
The purpose of this pass is to catch constructions that fit into AST data structures, but not permitted by the language. As an example, `impl`s don't have visibilities, but for convenience and uniformity with other items they are represented with a structure `Item` which has `Visibility` field.
This pass is intended to run after expansion of macros and syntax extensions (and before lowering to HIR), so it can catch erroneous constructions that were generated by them. This pass allows to remove ad hoc semantic checks from the parser, which can be overruled by syntax extensions and occasionally macros.
The checks can be put here if they are simple, local, don't require results of any complex analysis like name resolution or type checking and maybe don't logically fall into other passes. I expect most of errors generated by this pass to be non-fatal and allowing the compilation to proceed.
I intend to move some more checks to this pass later and maybe extend it with new checks, like, for example, identifier validity. Given that syntax extensions are going to be stabilized in the measurable future, it's important that they would not be able to subvert usual language rules.
In this patch I've added two new checks - a check for labels named `'static` and a check for lifetimes and labels named `'_`. The first one gives a hard error, the second one - a future compatibility warning.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33059 ([breaking-change])
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1177
r? @nrc
Distinguish fn item types to allow reification from nothing to fn pointers.
The first commit is a rebase of #26284, except for files that have moved since.
This is a [breaking-change], due to:
* each FFI function has a distinct type, like all other functions currently do
* all generic parameters on functions are recorded in their item types, e.g.:
`size_of::<u8>` & `size_of::<i8>`'s types differ despite their identical signature.
* function items are zero-sized, which will stop transmutes from working on them
The first two cases are handled in most cases with the new coerce-unify logic,
which will combine incompatible function item types into function pointers,
at the outer-most level of if-else chains, match arms and array literals.
The last case is specially handled during type-checking such that transmutes
from a function item type to a pointer or integer type will continue to work for
another release cycle, but are being linted against. To get rid of warnings and
ensure your code will continue to compile, cast to a pointer before transmuting.
There's a lot of stuff wrong with the representation of these types:
TyFnDef doesn't actually uniquely identify a function, TyFnPtr is used to
represent method calls, TyFnDef in the sub-expression of a cast isn't
correctly reified, and probably some other stuff I haven't discovered yet.
Splitting them seems like the right first step, though.
This PR privacy checks paths as they are resolved instead of in `librustc_privacy` (fixes#12334 and fixes#31779). This removes the need for the `LastPrivate` system introduced in PR #9735, the limitations of which cause #31779.
This PR also reports privacy violations in paths to intra- and inter-crate items the same way -- it always reports the first inaccessible segment of the path.
Since it fixes#31779, this is a [breaking-change]. For example, the following code would break:
```rust
mod foo {
pub use foo::bar::S;
mod bar { // `bar` should be private to `foo`
pub struct S;
}
}
impl foo::S {
fn f() {}
}
fn main() {
foo::bar::S::f(); // This is now a privacy error
}
```
r? @alexcrichton
