Modify ast::ExprMatch to include a new value of type ast::MatchSource,
making it easy to tell whether the match was written literally or
produced via desugaring. This allows us to customize error messages
appropriately.
I don't know exactly what made this regress so badly…maybe it was all the lifetimes that @eddyb landed. According to `git blame` this is all somewhat old code. Regardless this is an enormous improvement in compile times.
r? @brson
Fixes that unit-like structs cannot be used if they are reexported and
used in another crate. The compiler fails with an ICE, because unit-like
structs are exported as DefFn and the expression `UnitStruct` is
interpreted as function pointer instead of a call to the constructor.
To resolve this ambiguity tuple-like struct constructors are now exported
as CtorFn. When `rustc::metadata::decoder` finds a CtorFn it sets a new
flag `is_ctor` in DefFn to true.
Relevant changes are in `rustc::metadata::{encoder, decoder}` and in
`rustc::middle::ty`.
Closes#12660 and #16973.
This makes the windows `make dist` target start producing binary tarballs, and tweaks install.sh so they work, in preparation for working on a combined Rust+Cargo installer.
This is the bare minimum to stop using split stacks on Windows, fixing https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/13259 and #14742, by turning on stack probes for all functions and disabling compiler and runtime support for split stacks on Windows.
It does not restore the out-of-stack error message, which requires more runtime work.
This includes a test that the Windows TCB is no longer being clobbered, but the out-of-stack test itself is pretty weak, only testing that the program exits abnormally, not that it isn't writing to bogus memory, so I haven't truly verified that this is providing the safety we claim.
A more complete solution is in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/16388, which has some unresolved issues yet.
cc @Zoxc @klutzy @vadimcn
closes#17392
r? @nikomatsakis
Kind of a first draft because I'm not sure if this is the right approach. I believe the general idea of giving an error rather than an ICE in obligation_for_builtin_bound is right, but not sure about returning an Option, etc.
Also, could probably have a better error message.
