This is gated on edition 2018 & the `async_await` feature gate.
The parser will accept `async fn` and `async unsafe fn` as fn
items. Along the same lines as `const fn`, only `async unsafe fn`
is permitted, not `unsafe async fn`.The parser will not accept
`async` functions as trait methods.
To do a little code clean up, four fields of the function type
struct have been merged into the new `FnHeader` struct: constness,
asyncness, unsafety, and ABI.
Also, a small bug in HIR printing is fixed: it previously printed
`const unsafe fn` as `unsafe const fn`, which is grammatically
incorrect.
Ensure derive(PartialOrd) is no longer accidentally exponential
Previously, two comparison operations would be generated for each field, each of which could delegate to another derived PartialOrd. Now we use ordering and optional chaining to ensure each pair of fields is only compared once, addressing https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49650#issuecomment-379467572.
Closes#49505.
r? @Manishearth (sorry for changing it again so soon!)
Close#50755
Previously, two comparison operations would be generated for each field, each of which could delegate to another derived PartialOrd. Now we use ordering and optional chaining to ensure each pair of fields is only compared once.
Provide better names for builtin deriving-generated attributes
First attempt at fixing #49967
Not in love with any choices here, don't be shy if you aren't happy with anything :)
I've tested that this produces nicer names in documentation, and that it no longer has issues conflicting with constants with the same name. (I guess we _could_ make a test for that... unsure if that would be valuable)
In all cases I took the names from the methods as declared in the relevant trait.
In some cases I had to prepend the names with _ otherwise there were errors about un-used variables. I'm uneasy with the inconsistency... do they all need to be like that? Is there a way to generate an alternate impl or use a different name (`_`?) in the cases where the arguments are not used?
Lastly the gensym addition to Ident I implemented largely as suggested, but I want to point out it's a little circuitous (at least, as far as I understand it). `cx.ident_of(name)` is just `Ident::from_str`, so we create an Ident then another Ident from it. `Ident::with_empty_ctxt(Symbol::gensym(string))` may or may not be equivalent, I don't know if it's important to intern it _then_ gensym it. It seems like either we could use that, or if we do want a new method to make this convenient, it could be on Ident instead (`from_str_gensymed`?)
