This fixes ICEs caused by late-bound lifetimes ending up in argument
datum types and being used in cleanup - user Drop impl's would then
fail to monomorphize if the type was used to look up the impl of a
method call - which happens in trans now, I presume for multidispatch.
This fixes ICEs caused by late-bound lifetimes ending up in argument
datum types and being used in cleanup - user Drop impl's would then
fail to monomorphize if the type was used to look up the impl of a
method call - which happens in trans now, I presume for multidispatch.
This PR aims to improve the readability of diagnostic messages that involve unresolved type variables. Currently, messages like the following:
```rust
mismatched types: expected `core::result::Result<uint,()>`, found `core::option::Option<<generic #1>>`
<anon>:6 let a: Result<uint, ()> = None;
^~~~
mismatched types: expected `&mut <generic #2>`, found `uint`
<anon>:7 f(42u);
^~~
```
tend to appear unapproachable to new users. [0] While specific type var IDs are valuable in
diagnostics that deal with more than one such variable, in practice many messages
only mention one. In those cases, leaving out the specific number makes the messages
slightly less terrifying.
```rust
mismatched types: expected `core::result::Result<uint, ()>`, found `core::option::Option<_>`
<anon>:6 let a: Result<uint, ()> = None;
^~~~
mismatched types: expected `&mut _`, found `uint`
<anon>:7 f(42u);
^~~
```
As you can see, I also tweaked the aesthetics slightly by changing type variables to use the type hole syntax _. For integer variables, the syntax used is:
```rust
mismatched types: expected `core::result::Result<uint, ()>`, found `core::option::Option<_#1i>`
<anon>:6 let a: Result<uint, ()> = Some(1);
```
and float variables:
```rust
mismatched types: expected `core::result::Result<uint, ()>`, found `core::option::Option<_#1f>`
<anon>:6 let a: Result<uint, ()> = Some(0.5);
```
[0] https://twitter.com/coda/status/517713085465772032
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/2632.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/3404.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/18426.
I think it helps to show that the variables introduced in match blocks are indeed independent from the matched variable `x` (especially when `x` is still reachable inside those blocks and might be useful), so this renames them accordingly. Maybe some linter (or language-level warning?) will eventually warn about shadowing `x` in such cases. ;)
I’m not super happy about the matching-on-range example, as it’s too contrived (`e` and `x` are exactly the same here), but I couldn’t come up with something both simple and non-redundant.
This commit enables implementations of IndexMut for a number of collections,
including Vec, RingBuf, SmallIntMap, TrieMap, TreeMap, and HashMap. At the same
time this deprecates the `get_mut` methods on vectors in favor of using the
indexing notation.
cc #18424
I just found this patch which at some point solved a problem I encountered. Unfortunately I apparently dropped it before I managed to write a test case. I'll try to dig up the code that triggered the issue.
The error messages still aren’t as good as they were before DST, but they better
describe the actual problem, not mentioning `Sized` at all (because that bound
is normally implied, not explicitly stated).
Closes#17567.
Closes#18040.
Closes#18159.
When building for multiple targets, the initial 'make' invocation
always fails. The missing build stamp causes clean-llvm to be
invoked, but clean-llvm cleans *all* llvm builds. So what happens
is that 1) all llvm's are cleaned (a no-op), 2) llvm-${target1}
builds, 3) all llvm's are cleaned (deleting llvm-${target1}),
4) llvm-${target2} is built, 5) the remaining build for ${target1}
fails because llvm does not exist.
This makes the clean operation only clean the correct llvm build.
Should greatly reduce bot failures.
