While attempting to port Rust to s390x, I ran into an ABI violation
(that caused rust_eh_personality to be miscompiled, breaking unwinding).
The problem is that this function returns an enum type, which is
supposed to be sign-extended according to the s390x ABI. However,
common code would ignore target sign-/zero-extension rules for any
types that do not satisfy is_integral(), which includes enums.
For the general case of Rust enum types, which map to structure types
with a discriminant, that seems correct. However, in the special case
of simple enums that map directly to C enum types (i.e. LLVM integers),
this is incorrect; we must follow the target extension rules for those.
Signed-off-by: Ulrich Weigand <ulrich.weigand@de.ibm.com>
resolve: Suggest `use self` when import resolves
Improves errors messages by replacing "Maybe a missing `extern crate`" messages
with "Did you mean `self::...`" when the `self` import would succeed.
Fixes#34191.
Thank you for the help @jseyfried!
Fix "field is never used" warning to take unions into account
When compiling code containing a union with an unused field, rustc says
"struct field is never used".
Rather than saying "struct or union", or adding logic to determine the
type of the item, just change the message to "field is never used",
dropping the "struct".
Update tests accordingly.
incr. comp.: Take spans into account for ICH
This PR makes the ICH (incr. comp. hash) take spans into account when debuginfo is enabled.
A side-effect of this is that the SVH (which is based on the ICHs of all items in the crate) becomes sensitive to the tiniest change in a code base if debuginfo is enabled. Since we are not trying to model ABI compatibility via the SVH anymore (this is done via the crate disambiguator now), this should be not be a problem.
Fixes#33888.
Fixes#32753.
Updated E0559 to new format
Refactored a method that printed one suggested field name,
into a method that returns an `Option` of a suggestion
(Updated test cases accordingly)
r? @jonathandturner
Closes#36197
Update Error format for E0516, E0517, E0518
- E0518 Update error format #36111
- E0517 Update error format #36109
- E0516 Update error format #36108
- Part of #35233
r? @jonathandturner
config.toml now accepts a target.$TARGET.musl-root key that lets you
override the "build" musl-root value, which is set via the --musl-root
flag or via the build.musl-root key.
With this change, it's now possible to compile std for several musl
targets at once. Here's are the sample commands to do such thing:
```
$ configure \
--enable-rustbuild \
--target=x86_64-unknown-linux-musl,arm-unknown-linux-musleabi \
--musl-root=/musl/x86_64-unknown-linux-musl/
$ edit config.toml && tail config.toml
[target.arm-unknown-linux-musleabi]
musl-root = "/x-tools/arm-unknown-linux-musleabi/arm-unknown-linux-musleabi/sysroot/usr"
$ make
```
rustdoc: Fix associated consts in search results
Associated consts can appear in none trait impls so need to be treated
like methods when generating the search index.
Fixes#36031
Fix issue #36036.
Fix#36036.
We were treating an associated type as unsized even when the concrete instantiation was actually sized. Fix is to normalize before checking if it is sized.
Fix incorrect LLVM Linkage enum
Followup of #33994 to actually work.
The `Linkage` enum in librustc_llvm got out of sync with the version in LLVM and it caused two variants of the `#[linkage=""]` attribute to break.
This adds the functions `LLVMRustGetLinkage` and `LLVMRustSetLinkage` which convert between the Rust Linkage enum and the LLVM one, which should stop this from breaking every time LLVM changes it.
Possible remaining concerns:
1. There could be a codegen test to make sure that the attributes are applied correctly (I don't know how to do this).
2. ~~The test does not exercise the `appending` linkage. I can't figure out how to make a global static raw pointer to an array. This might not even be possible? If not we should probably remove appending linkage as its unusable in rust.~~ Appending linkage is not 'emittable' anyway.
3. The test only runs on Linux.
Fixes#33992
r? @alexcrichton
Typecheck refactor for `!`
Ping @nikomatsakis @eddyb. This is the PR for the typeck refactor for `!`. Is this what you guys had in mind? Is there anything else that needs doing on it?
