[rustdoc] Fix type based search
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/114522.
The problem was a bit more tricky than I originally thought it would be: we only kept type ID and generics in short, but as soon as there was a full path in the user query, the element didn't get an ID anymore because the ID map didn't know about `x::y` (although it knew about `y`). So for this first problem, I instead always pass the element name to get the ID.
Then a new problem occurred: we actually needed to check if paths matched, otherwise whatever the path, as long as the "end types" match, it's all good. meaning, we needed to add path information, but to do so, we needed it to be added into the search index directly as there was no mapping between `"p"` and `"q"`.
I hope this explanation makes sense to someone else than me. ^^'
r? `@notriddle`
Skip rendering metadata strings from include_str!/include_bytes!
The const rendering code in rustdoc completely ignores consts from expansions, but the compiler was rendering all consts. So some consts (namely those from `include_bytes!`) were rendered then ignored.
Most of the diff here is from moving `print_const_expr` from rustdoc into `rustc_hir_pretty` so that it can be used in rustdoc and when building rmeta files.
Implement Step for ascii::Char
This allows iterating over ranges of `ascii::Char`, similarly to ranges of `char`.
Note that `ascii::Char` is still unstable, tracked in #110998.
Lower `Or` pattern without allocating place
cc `@azizghuloum` `@cjgillot`
Related to #111583 and #111644
While reviewing #111644, it occurs to me that while we directly lower conjunctive predicates, which are connected with `&&`, into the desirable control flow, today we don't directly lower the disjunctive predicates, which are connected with `||`, in the similar fashion. Instead, we allocate a place for the boolean temporary to hold the result of evaluating the `||` expression.
Usually I would expect optimization at later stages to "inline" the evaluation of boolean predicates into simple CFG, but #111583 is an example where `&&` is failing to be optimized away and the assembly shows that both the expensive operands are evaluated. Therefore, I would like to make a small change to make the CFG a bit more straight-forward without invoking the `as_temp` machinery, and plus avoid allocating the place to hold the boolean result as well.
Permit recursive weak type aliases
I saw #63097 and thought "we can do ~~better~~ funnier". So here it is. It's not useful, but it's certainly something. This may actually become feasible with lazy norm (so in 5 years (constant, not reducing over time)).
r? `@estebank`
cc `@GuillaumeGomez`
Capture lifetimes for associated type bounds destined to be lowered to opaques
Some associated type bounds get lowered to opaques, but they're not represented in the AST as opaques.
That means that we never collect lifetimes for them (`record_lifetime_params_for_impl_trait`) which are used currently for RPITITs, which capture all of their in-scope lifetimes[^1]. This means that the nested RPITITs that arise from some type like `impl Foo<Type: Bar>` (~> `impl Foo<Type = impl Bar>`) don't capture any lifetimes, leading to ICEs.
This PR makes sure we collect the lifetimes for associated type bounds as well, and make sure that they are set up correctly for opaque type lowering later.
Fixes#115360
[^1]: #114489
Work around ICE in diagnostics for local super-universes missing `UniverseInfo`s
In issue #114907, canonicalization of liveness dropck-outlives results (IIUC) encounters universes absent from the original query. Some local universes [are created](f3a1bae88c/compiler/rustc_infer/src/infer/canonical/query_response.rs (L417-L425)) for the mapping, but importantly, they won't have associated causes.
These missing `UniverseInfo`s can be [needed](f3a1bae88c/compiler/rustc_borrowck/src/diagnostics/region_errors.rs (L376)) during diagnostics, [causing the `IndexMap: key not found` ICE](d55522aad8/compiler/rustc_borrowck/src/region_infer/mod.rs (L2252)) seen in the issue.
This PR works around this by returning the suboptimal catch-all cause, to avoid the ICE. It does results in suboptimal diagnostics right now, but it's better than an ICE.
r? `@matthewjasper.`
Let me know if there's a good easy-ish way to fix this, but I believe that for some of these erroneous cases and diagnostics, that inference/canonicalization/higher-ranked subtyping/etc may not behave exactly the same with the new trait solver? If that's the case then it'd probably be best to wait a bit more to do the correct fix.
Fixes#114907.
cc `@aliemjay`
`rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range` makes ctors unsafe
We already validate this when we use the ctor in a call, e.g. `Variant(1)`, but not if we use the ctor as a fn ptr, e.g. `.map(Variant)`. The easiest way to fix the latter is (afaict) is by marking the ctor as unsafe itself.
Fixes#115284
Fix inlining with -Zalways-encode-mir
Only inline functions that are considered eligible for inlining
by the reachability pass.
This constraint was previously indirectly enforced by only exporting MIR
of eligible functions, but that approach doesn't work with
-Zalways-encode-mir enabled.
Add `ParallelGuard` type to handle unwinding in parallel sections
This adds a `ParallelGuard` type to handle unwinding in parallel sections instead of manually dealing with panics in each parallel operation. This also adds proper panic handling to the `join` operation.
cc `@SparrowLii`
Don't suggest adding parentheses to call an inaccessible method.
Previously, code of this form would emit E0615 (attempt to use a method as a field), thus emphasizing the existence of private methods that the programmer probably does not care about. Now it ignores their existence instead, producing error E0609 (no field). The motivating example is:
```rust
let x = std::rc::Rc::new(());
x.inner;
```
which would previously mention the private method `Rc::inner()`, even though `Rc<T>` intentionally has no public methods so that it can be a transparent smart pointer for any `T`.
```rust
error[E0615]: attempted to take value of method `inner` on type `Rc<()>`
--> src/main.rs:3:3
|
3 | x.inner;
| ^^^^^ method, not a field
|
help: use parentheses to call the method
|
3 | x.inner();
| ++
```
With this change, it emits E0609 and no suggestion.
new solver: handle edge case of a recursion limit of 0
Apparently a recursion limit of 0 is possible/valid/useful/used/cute, the more you know 🌟 .
(It's somewhat interesting to me that the old solver seemingly handles this, and that the new solver currently requires a recursion limit of 2 here)
r? `@compiler-errors.`
Fixes#115351.
suggest removing `impl` in generic trait bound position
rustc already does this recovery in type param position (`<T: impl Trait>` -> `<T: Trait>`).
This PR also adds that suggestion in trait bound position (e.g. `where T: impl Trait` or `trait Trait { type Assoc: impl Trait; }`)
Make `get_return_block()` return `Some` only for HIR nodes in body
Fixes#114918
The issue occurred while compiling the following input:
```rust
fn uwu() -> [(); { () }] {
loop {}
}
```
It was caused by the code below trying to suggest a missing return type which resulted in a const eval cycle: 1bd043098e/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/suggestions.rs (L68-L75)
The root cause was `get_return_block()` returning an `Fn` node for a node in the return type (i.e. the second `()` in the return type `[(); { () }]` of the input) although it is supposed to do so only for nodes that lie in the body of the function and return `None` otherwise (at least as per my understanding).
The PR fixes the issue by fixing this behaviour of `get_return_block()`.
parser: not insert dummy field in struct
Fixes#114636
This PR eliminates the dummy field, initially introduced in #113999, thereby enabling unrestricted use of `ident.unwrap()`. A side effect of this action is that we can only report the error of the first macro invocation field within the struct node.
An alternative solution might be giving a virtual name to the macro, but it appears more complex.(https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/114636#issuecomment-1670228715). Furthermore, if you think https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/114636#issuecomment-1670228715 is a better solution, feel free to close this PR.
