Update BARE_TRAIT_OBJECT and ELLIPSIS_INCLUSIVE_RANGE_PATTERNS to errors in Rust 2021
This addresses https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/81244 by updating two lints to errors in the Rust 2021 edition.
r? `@estebank`
further split up const_fn feature flag
This continues the work on splitting up `const_fn` into separate feature flags:
* `const_fn_trait_bound` for `const fn` with trait bounds
* `const_fn_unsize` for unsizing coercions in `const fn` (looks like only `dyn` unsizing is still guarded here)
I don't know if there are even any things left that `const_fn` guards... at least libcore and liballoc do not need it any more.
`@oli-obk` are you currently able to do reviews?
Stablize `non-ascii-idents`
This is the stablization PR for RFC 2457. Currently this is waiting on fcp in [tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/55467).
r? `@Manishearth`
Add incomplete feature gate for inherent associate types.
Mentored by ``````@oli-obk``````
So far the only change is that instead of giving an automatic error, the following code compiles:
```rust
struct Foo;
impl Foo {
type Bar = isize;
}
```
The backend work to make it actually usable isn't there yet. In particular, this:
```rust
let x : Foo::Bar;
```
will give you:
```sh
error[E0223]: ambiguous associated type
--> /$RUSTC_DIR/src/test/ui/assoc-inherent.rs:15:13
|
LL | let x : Foo::Bar;
| ^^^^^^^^ help: use fully-qualified syntax: `<Foo as Trait>::Bar`
```
- Rename `broken_intra_doc_links` to `rustdoc::broken_intra_doc_links`
- Ensure that the old lint names still work and give deprecation errors
- Register lints even when running doctests
Otherwise, all `rustdoc::` lints would be ignored.
- Register all existing lints as removed
This unfortunately doesn't work with `register_renamed` because tool
lints have not yet been registered when rustc is running. For similar
reasons, `check_backwards_compat` doesn't work either. Call
`register_removed` directly instead.
- Fix fallout
+ Rustdoc lints for compiler/
+ Rustdoc lints for library/
Note that this does *not* suggest `rustdoc::broken_intra_doc_links` for
`rustdoc::intra_doc_link_resolution_failure`, since there was no time
when the latter was valid.
[librustdoc] Only split lang string on `,`, ` `, and `\t`
Split markdown lang strings into tokens on `,`.
The previous behavior was to split lang strings into tokens on any
character that wasn't a `_`, `_`, or alphanumeric.
This is a potentially breaking change, so please scrutinize! See discussion in #78344.
I noticed some test cases that made me wonder if there might have been some reason for the original behavior:
```
t("{.no_run .example}", false, true, Ignore::None, true, false, false, false, v(), None);
t("{.sh .should_panic}", true, false, Ignore::None, false, false, false, false, v(), None);
t("{.example .rust}", false, false, Ignore::None, true, false, false, false, v(), None);
t("{.test_harness .rust}", false, false, Ignore::None, true, true, false, false, v(), None);
```
It seemed pretty peculiar to specifically test lang strings in braces, with all the tokens prefixed by `.`.
I did some digging, and it looks like the test cases were added way back in [this commit from 2014](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/commit/3fef7a74ca9a) by `@skade.`
It looks like they were added just to make sure that the splitting was permissive, and aren't testing that those strings in particular are accepted.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/78344.
Replace if-let and while-let with `if let` and `while let`
This pull request replaces if-let and while-let with `if let` and `while let`.
closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82205
Only split doctest lang strings on `,`, ` `, and `\t`. Additionally, to
preserve backwards compatibility with pandoc-style langstrings, strip a
surrounding `{}`, and remove leading `.`s from each token.
Prior to this change, doctest lang strings were split on all
non-alphanumeric characters except `-` or `_`, which limited future
extensions to doctest lang string tokens, for example using `=` for
key-value tokens.
This is a breaking change, although it is not expected to be disruptive,
because lang strings using separators other than `,` and ` ` are not
very common
Improve SIMD type element count validation
Resolvesrust-lang/stdsimd#53.
These changes are motivated by `stdsimd` moving in the direction of const generic vectors, e.g.:
```rust
#[repr(simd)]
struct SimdF32<const N: usize>([f32; N]);
```
This makes a few changes:
* Establishes a maximum SIMD lane count of 2^16 (65536). This value is arbitrary, but attempts to validate lane count before hitting potential errors in the backend. It's not clear what LLVM's maximum lane count is, but cranelift's appears to be much less than `usize::MAX`, at least.
* Expands some SIMD intrinsics to support arbitrary lane counts. This resolves the ICE in the linked issue.
* Attempts to catch invalid-sized vectors during typeck when possible.
Unresolved questions:
* Generic-length vectors can't be validated in typeck and are only validated after monomorphization while computing layout. This "works", but the errors simply bail out with no context beyond the name of the type. Should these errors instead return `LayoutError` or otherwise provide context in some way? As it stands, users of `stdsimd` could trivially produce monomorphization errors by making zero-length vectors.
cc `@bjorn3`
Add a new ABI to support cmse_nonsecure_call
This adds support for the `cmse_nonsecure_call` feature to be able to perform non-secure function call.
See the discussion on Zulip [here](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Support.20for.20callsite.20attributes/near/223054928).
This is a followup to #75810 which added `cmse_nonsecure_entry`. As for that PR, I assume that the changes are small enough to not have to go through a RFC but I don't mind doing one if needed 😃
I did not yet create a tracking issue, but if most of it is fine, I can create one and update the various files accordingly (they refer to the other tracking issue now).
On the Zulip chat, I believe `@jonas-schievink` volunteered to be a reviewer 💯
