For some weird reason this fixes `intrinsic-move-val`. It also affects
various test heuristics. I removed one test (`reborrow_basic`) that
didn't seem to really be testing anything in particular anymore,
compared to all the other tests we've got.
rustc_resolve: inject `uniform_paths` canaries regardless of the feature-gate, on Rust 2018.
This PR is an attempt at future-proofing "anchored paths" by emitting the same ambiguity errors that `#![feature(uniform_paths)]` would, with slightly changed phrasing (see added UI tests).
Also, on top of #54005, this PR allows this as well:
```rust
use crate_name;
use crate_name::foo;
```
In that any ambiguity between an extern crate and an import *of that same crate* is ignored.
r? @petrochenkov cc @aturon @Centril @joshtriplett
#53359: putting multiple unresolved import on single line
r? @estebank
Here is WIP implementation of #53359
this PR have clubbed multiple unresolved imports into a single line.
I think still two things need to improve like giving specific `label message` for each span of multi_span(how we can do this?) and second we are getting a warning while compiling, stating something like `E0432` have been passed before.
resolve: Split macro prelude into built-in and user-defined parts
This is a refactoring that will help to remove `unshadowable_attrs` when https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/53410 lands.
UPDATE: The second commit actually removes `unshadowable_attrs`.
resolve: Relax shadowing restrictions on macro-expanded macros
Previously any macro-expanded macros weren't allowed to shadow macros from outer scopes.
Now only "more macro-expanded" macros cannot shadow "less macro-expanded" macros.
See comments to `fn may_appear_after` and added tests for more details and examples.
The functional changes are a21f6f588fc28c97533130ae44a6957b579ab58c and 46dd365ce9ca0a6b8653849b80267763c542842a, other commits are refactorings.
Stabilize edition 2018; also updates Clippy, RLS and Cargo
Supersedes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/53999 , https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/53935
Clippy build was failing there because crate_visibility_modifier feature was taken out of edition 2018 and clippy used it.
The clippy update enables the corresponding feature explicitly.
r? @Mark-Simulacrum
proc_macro::Group::span_open and span_close
Before this addition, every delimited group like `(`...`)` `[`...`]` `{`...`}` has only a single Span that covers the full source location from opening delimiter to closing delimiter. This makes it impossible for a procedural macro to trigger an error pointing to just the opening or closing delimiter. The Rust compiler does not seem to have the same limitation:
```rust
mod m {
type T =
}
```
```console
error: expected type, found `}`
--> src/main.rs:3:1
|
3 | }
| ^
```
On that same input, a procedural macro would be forced to trigger the error on the last token inside the block, on the entire block, or on the next token after the block, none of which is really what you want for an error like above.
This commit adds `group.span_open()` and `group.span_close()` which access the Span associated with just the opening delimiter and just the closing delimiter of the group. Relevant to Syn as we implement real error messages for when parsing fails in a procedural macro: https://github.com/dtolnay/syn/issues/476.
```diff
impl Group {
fn span(&self) -> Span;
+ fn span_open(&self) -> Span;
+ fn span_close(&self) -> Span;
}
```
Fixes#48187
r? @alexcrichton
rustc_codegen_llvm: don't assume offsets are always aligned.
Fixes#53728 by taking into account not just overall type alignment and the field's alignment when determining whether a field is aligned or not ("packed"), but also the field's offset within the type.
Previously, rustc assumed that the offset was always at least as aligned as `min(struct.align, field.align)`. However, there's no real reason to have that assumption, and it obviously can't always be true after we implement `#[repr(align(N), pack(K))]`. There's also a case today where that assumption is not true, involving niche discriminants in enums:
Suppose that we have the code in #53728:
```Rust
#[repr(u16)]
enum DeviceKind {
Nil = 0,
}
#[repr(packed)]
struct DeviceInfo {
endianness: u8,
device_kind: DeviceKind,
}
struct Wrapper {
device_info: DeviceInfo,
data: u32
}
```
Observe the layout of `Option<Wrapper>`. It has an alignment of 4 because of the `u32`. `device_info.device_kind` is a good niche field to use, which means the enum ends up with this layout:
```
size = 8
align = 4
fields = [
{ offset=1, type=u16 } // discriminant, .<Some>.device_info.device_kind
]
```
And here we have an discriminant with alignment 2 (`u16`) but offset 1.
