Const unification is already infallible, remove the error handling logic
r? `@lcnr`
is this expected to be used in the future? Right now it is dead code.
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #101598 (Update rustc's information on Android's sanitizers)
- #102036 (Remove use of `io::ErrorKind::Other` in std)
- #102037 (Make cycle errors recoverable)
- #102069 (Skip `Equate` relation in `handle_opaque_type`)
- #102076 (rustc_transmute: fix big-endian discriminants)
- #102107 (Add missing space between notable trait tooltip and where clause)
- #102119 (Fix a typo “pararmeter” in error message)
- #102131 (Added which number is computed in compute_float.)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Make cycle errors recoverable
In particular, this allows rustdoc to recover from cycle errors when normalizing associated types for documentation.
In the past, ```@jackh726``` has said we need to be careful about overflow errors: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/91430#issuecomment-983997013
> Off the top of my head, we definitely should be careful about treating overflow errors the same as
"not implemented for some reason" errors. Otherwise, you could end up with behavior that is
different depending on recursion depth. But, that might be context-dependent.
But cycle errors should be safe to unconditionally report; they don't depend on the recursion depth, they will always be an error whenever they're encountered.
Helps with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81091.
r? ```@lcnr``` cc ```@matthewjasper```
Normalize opaques w/ bound vars
First, we reenable normalization of opaque types with escaping late bound regions to fix rust-lang/miri#2433. This essentially reverts #89285.
Second, we mitigate the perf regression found in #88862 by simplifying the way that we relate (sub and eq) GeneratorWitness types.
This relies on the fact that we construct these GeneratorWitness types somewhat particularly (with all free regions found in the witness types replaced with late bound regions) -- but those bound regions really should be treated as existential regions, not universal ones. Those two facts leads me to believe that we do not need to use the full `higher_ranked_sub` machinery to relate two generator witnesses. I'm pretty confident that this is correct, but I'm glad to discuss this further.
Move and rename `SessionDiagnostic` & `SessionSubdiagnostic` traits and macros
After PR #101434, we want to:
- [x] Move `SessionDiagnostic` to `rustc_errors`.
- [x] Add `emit_` methods that accept `impl SessionDiagnostic` to `Handler`.
- [x] _(optional)_ Rename trait `SessionDiagnostic` to `DiagnosticHandler`.
- [x] _(optional)_ Rename macro `SessionDiagnostic` to `DiagnosticHandler`.
- [x] Update Rustc Dev Guide and Docs to reflect these changes. https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/pull/1460
Now I am having build issues getting the compiler to build when trying to rename the macro.
<details>
<summary>See diagnostics errors and context when building.</summary>
```
error: diagnostics should only be created in `SessionDiagnostic`/`AddSubdiagnostic` impls
--> compiler/rustc_attr/src/session_diagnostics.rs:13:10
|
13 | #[derive(DiagnosticHandler)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ in this derive macro expansion
|
::: /Users/jhonny/.cargo/registry/src/github.com-1ecc6299db9ec823/synstructure-0.12.6/src/macros.rs:94:9
|
94 | / pub fn $derives(
95 | | i: $crate::macros::TokenStream
96 | | ) -> $crate::macros::TokenStream {
| |________________________________________- in this expansion of `#[derive(DiagnosticHandler)]`
|
note: the lint level is defined here
--> compiler/rustc_attr/src/lib.rs:10:9
|
10 | #![deny(rustc::diagnostic_outside_of_impl)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
And also this one:
```
error: diagnostics should only be created in `SessionDiagnostic`/`AddSubdiagnostic` impls
--> compiler/rustc_attr/src/session_diagnostics.rs:213:32
|
213 | let mut diag = handler.struct_span_err_with_code(
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
> **Note**
> Can't find where this message is coming from, because you can see in [this experimental branch](https://github.com/JhonnyBillM/rust/tree/experimental/trying-to-rename-session-diagnostic-macro) that I updated all errors and diags to say:
> error: diagnostics should only be created in **`DiagnosticHandler`**/`AddSubdiagnostic` impls
> and not:
> error: diagnostics should only be created in **`SessionDiagnostic`**/`AddSubdiagnostic` impls
</details>
I tried building the compiler in different ways (playing with the stages etc), but nothing worked.
## Question
**Do we need to build or do something different when renaming a macro and identifiers?**
For context, see experimental commit f2193a98b4 where the macro and symbols are renamed, but it doesn't compile.
FIX - ambiguous Diagnostic link in docs
UPDATE - rename diagnostic_items to IntoDiagnostic and AddToDiagnostic
[Gardening] FIX - formatting via `x fmt`
FIX - rebase conflicts. NOTE: Confirm wheather or not we want to handle TargetDataLayoutErrorsWrapper this way
DELETE - unneeded allow attributes in Handler method
FIX - broken test
FIX - Rebase conflict
UPDATE - rename residual _SessionDiagnostic and fix LintDiag link
In particular, this allows rustdoc to recover from cycle errors when normalizing associated types for documentation.
In the past, `@jackh726` has said we need to be careful about overflow errors:
> Off the top of my head, we definitely should be careful about treating overflow errors the same as
"not implemented for some reason" errors. Otherwise, you could end up with behavior that is
different depending on recursion depth. But, that might be context-dependent.
But cycle errors should be safe to unconditionally report; they don't depend on the recursion depth, they will always be an error whenever they're encountered.
On later stages, the feature is already stable.
Result of running:
rg -l "feature.let_else" compiler/ src/librustdoc/ library/ | xargs sed -s -i "s#\\[feature.let_else#\\[cfg_attr\\(bootstrap, feature\\(let_else\\)#"
Initial implementation of dyn*
This PR adds extremely basic and incomplete support for [dyn*](https://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps//blog/2022/03/29/dyn-can-we-make-dyn-sized/). The goal is to get something in tree behind a flag to make collaboration easier, and also to make sure the implementation so far is not unreasonable. This PR does quite a few things:
* Introduce `dyn_star` feature flag
* Adds parsing for `dyn* Trait` types
* Defines `dyn* Trait` as a sized type
* Adds support for explicit casts, like `42usize as dyn* Debug`
* Including const evaluation of such casts
* Adds codegen for drop glue so things are cleaned up properly when a `dyn* Trait` object goes out of scope
* Adds codegen for method calls, at least for methods that take `&self`
Quite a bit is still missing, but this gives us a starting point. Note that this is never intended to become stable surface syntax for Rust, but rather `dyn*` is planned to be used as an implementation detail for async functions in dyn traits.
Joint work with `@nikomatsakis` and `@compiler-errors.`
r? `@bjorn3`
Emit a note that static bounds from HRTBs are a bug
This note isn't perfect, but opening this to either 1) land as is or 2) get some feedback on how to improve it
Let r? `@compiler-errors` and cc. `@nikomatsakis`
Make `compare_predicate_entailment` no longer a query
Make `compare_predicate_entailment` so it's no longer a query (again), and splits out the new logic (that equates the return types to infer RPITITs) into its own query. This means that this new query (now called `collect_trait_impl_trait_tys`) is no longer executed for non-RPITIT cases.
This should improve perf (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/101224#issuecomment-1241682203), though in practice we see that these some crates remain from the primary regressions list on the original report... They are all <= 0.43% regression and seemingly only on the incr-full scenario for all of them.
I am at a loss for what might be causing this regression other than what I fixed here, since we don't introduce much new non-RPITIT logic except for some `def_kind` query calls in some places, for example, like projection. Maybe that's it?
----
Originally this PR was opened to test enabling `cache_on_disk` (62164aaaa11) but that didn't turn out to be very useful (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/101615#issuecomment-1242403205), so that led me to just split the query (and rename the PR).
const_generics: correctly deal with bound variables
removes the hack in `resolve` which was needed because we evaluated constants without caring about their bound variables.
Each commit should be fairly self-contained, even if they build on each other
r? `@jackh726`
Migrate another part of rustc_infer to session diagnostic
Probably will migrate another file before marking this one as ready-to-merge.
`@rustbot` label +A-translation
r? rust-lang/diagnostics
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/100717
Update `SessionDiagnostic::into_diagnostic` to take `Handler` instead of `ParseSess`
Suggested by the team in [this Zulip Topic](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/336883-i18n/topic/.23100717.20SessionDiagnostic.20on.20Handler).
`Handler` already has almost all the capabilities of `ParseSess` when it comes to diagnostic emission, in this migration we only needed to add the ability to access `source_map` from the emitter in order to get a `Snippet` and the `start_point`. Not sure if adding these two methods [`span_to_snippet_from_emitter` and `span_start_point_from_emitter`] is the best way to address this gap.
P.S. If this goes in the right direction, then we probably may want to move `SessionDiagnostic` to `rustc_errors` and rename it to `DiagnosticHandler` or something similar.
r? `@davidtwco`
r? `@compiler-errors`
Suggested by the team in this Zulip Topic https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/336883-i18n/topic/.23100717.20SessionDiagnostic.20on.20Handler
Handler already has almost all the capabilities of ParseSess when it comes to diagnostic emission, in this migration we only needed to add the ability to access source_map from the emitter in order to get a Snippet and the start_point. Not sure if this is the best way to address this gap
This PR will fix some typos detected by [typos].
I only picked the ones I was sure were spelling errors to fix, mostly in
the comments.
[typos]: https://github.com/crate-ci/typos
Attempt to normalize `FnDef` signature in `InferCtxt::cmp`
Stashes a normalization callback in `InferCtxt` so that the signature we get from `tcx.fn_sig(..).subst(..)` in `InferCtxt::cmp` can be properly normalized, since we cannot expect for it to have normalized types since it comes straight from astconv.
This is kind of a hack, but I will say that `@jyn514` found the fact that we present unnormalized types to be very confusing in real life code, and I agree with that feeling. Though altogether I am still a bit unsure about whether this PR is worth the effort, so I'm open to alternatives and/or just closing it outright.
On the other hand, this isn't a ridiculously heavy implementation anyways -- it's less than a hundred lines of changes, and half of that is just miscellaneous cleanup.
This is stacked onto #100471 which is basically unrelated, and it can be rebased off of that when that lands or if needed.
---
The code:
```rust
trait Foo { type Bar; }
impl<T> Foo for T {
type Bar = i32;
}
fn foo<T>(_: <T as Foo>::Bar) {}
fn needs_i32_ref_fn(f: fn(&'static i32)) {}
fn main() {
needs_i32_ref_fn(foo::<()>);
}
```
Before:
```
= note: expected fn pointer `fn(&'static i32)`
found fn item `fn(<() as Foo>::Bar) {foo::<()>}`
```
After:
```
= note: expected fn pointer `fn(&'static i32)`
found fn item `fn(i32) {foo::<()>}`
```
Do not leak type variables from opaque type relation
The "root cause" is that we call `InferCtxt::resolve_vars_if_possible` (3d9dd681f5) on the types we get back in `TypeError::Sorts` since I added a call to it in `InferCtxt::same_type_modulo_infer`. However if this `TypeError` comes from a `InferCtxt::commit_if_ok`, then it may reference type variables that do not exist anymore, which is problematic.
We avoid this by substituting the `TypeError` with the types we had before being generalized while handling opaques.
This is kinda gross, and I feel like we can get the same issue from other places where we generalize type/const inference variables. Maybe not? I don't know.
Fixes#99914Fixes#99970Fixes#100463
