* The lint visitor's visit_ty method did not recurse, and had a
reference to the now closed#10894
* The newly enabled recursion has only affected the `deprectated` lint
which now detects uses of deprecated items in trait impls and
function return types
* Renamed some references to `CowString` and `CowVec` to `Cow<str>` and
`Cow<[T]>`, respectively, which appear outside of the crate which
defines them
* Replaced a few instances of `InvariantType<T>` with
`PhantomData<Cell<T>>`
* Disabled the `deprecated` lint in several places that
reference/implement traits on deprecated items which will get cleaned
up in the future
* Disabled the `exceeding_bitshifts` lint for
compile-fail/huge-array-simple test so it doesn't shadow the expected
error on 32bit systems
* Unfortunately, this means that if a library declares
`#![deny(deprecated)]` and marks anything as deprecated, it will have
to disable the lint for any uses of said item, e.g. any impl the now
deprecated item
For any library that denies deprecated items but has deprecated items
of its own, this is a [breaking-change]
This pulls out the implementations of most built-in lints into a
separate crate, to reduce edit-compile-test iteration times with
librustc_lint and increase parallelism. This should enable lints to be
refactored, added and deleted much more easily as it slashes the
edit-compile cycle to get a minimal working compiler to test with (`make
rustc-stage1`) from
librustc -> librustc_typeck -> ... -> librustc_driver ->
libcore -> ... -> libstd
to
librustc_lint -> librustc_driver -> libcore -> ... libstd
which is significantly faster, mainly due to avoiding the librustc build
itself.
The intention would be to move as much as possible of the infrastructure
into the crate too, but the plumbing is deeply intertwined with librustc
itself at the moment. Also, there are lints for which diagnostics are
registered directly in the compiler code, not in their own crate
traversal, and their definitions have to remain in librustc.
This is a [breaking-change] for direct users of the compiler APIs:
callers of `rustc::session::build_session` or
`rustc::session::build_session_` need to manually call
`rustc_lint::register_builtins` on their return value.
This should make #22206 easier.
This allows warning or forbidding all uses of unsafe code, whereas
previously only unsafe blocks were caught by the lint.
The lint has been renamed from `unsafe-blocks` to `unsafe-code` to
reflect its new purpose.
This is a minor [breaking-change]
Closes#22430
Checks include declaration/implementation of unsafe functions, traits,
and methods.
This allows warning or forbidding all uses of unsafe code, whereas
previously only unsafe blocks were caught by the lint.
The lint has been renamed from `unsafe-blocks` to `unsafe-code` to
reflect its new purpose.
This is a minor [breaking-change]
Closes#22430
This renames the PrivateNoMangleFns lint to allow both to happen in a
single pass, since they do roughly the same work.
Closes#21856
Open questions:
[ ]: Do the tests actually pass (I'm running make check and running out the door now)
[ ]: Is the name of this lint ok. it seems to mostly be fine with [convention](cc53afbe5d/text/0344-conventions-galore.md (lints))
[ ]: I'm not super thrilled about the warning text
r? @kmcallister (Shamelessly nominating because you were looking at my other ticket)
E.g. `fn foo() { foo() }`, or, more subtlely
impl Foo for Box<Foo+'static> {
fn bar(&self) {
self.bar();
}
}
The compiler will warn and point out the points where recursion occurs,
if it determines that the function cannot return without calling itself.
Closes#17899.
This gets rid of the 'experimental' level, removes the non-staged_api
case (i.e. stability levels for out-of-tree crates), and lets the
staged_api attributes use 'unstable' and 'deprecated' lints.
This makes the transition period to the full feature staging design
a bit nicer.
This partially implements the feature staging described in the
[release channel RFC][rc]. It does not yet fully conform to the RFC as
written, but does accomplish its goals sufficiently for the 1.0 alpha
release.
It has three primary user-visible effects:
* On the nightly channel, use of unstable APIs generates a warning.
* On the beta channel, use of unstable APIs generates a warning.
* On the beta channel, use of feature gates generates a warning.
Code that does not trigger these warnings is considered 'stable',
modulo pre-1.0 bugs.
Disabling the warnings for unstable APIs continues to be done in the
existing (i.e. old) style, via `#[allow(...)]`, not that specified in
the RFC. I deem this marginally acceptable since any code that must do
this is not using the stable dialect of Rust.
Use of feature gates is itself gated with the new 'unstable_features'
lint, on nightly set to 'allow', and on beta 'warn'.
The attribute scheme used here corresponds to an older version of the
RFC, with the `#[staged_api]` crate attribute toggling the staging
behavior of the stability attributes, but the user impact is only
in-tree so I'm not concerned about having to make design changes later
(and I may ultimately prefer the scheme here after all, with the
`#[staged_api]` crate attribute).
Since the Rust codebase itself makes use of unstable features the
compiler and build system to a midly elaborate dance to allow it to
bootstrap while disobeying these lints (which would otherwise be
errors because Rust builds with `-D warnings`).
This patch includes one significant hack that causes a
regression. Because the `format_args!` macro emits calls to unstable
APIs it would trigger the lint. I added a hack to the lint to make it
not trigger, but this in turn causes arguments to `println!` not to be
checked for feature gates. I don't presently understand macro
expansion well enough to fix. This is bug #20661.
Closes#16678
[rc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0507-release-channels.md
`#[deriving]` has been changed to `#[derive]`, so we should update this lint accordingly so that it remains consistent with the language.
Also register the rename with the LintStore.
I've changed the one reference to `raw_pointer_deriving` that occurs in the tests (as well as renamed the file appropriately), but the rest of the `raw_pointer_deriving`s in the Rust codebase will need to wait for a snapshot to be changed because stage0 doesn't know about the new lint name. I'll take care of the remaining renaming after the next snapshot.
Closes#20498.
macro_rules! is like an item that defines a macro. Other items don't have a
trailing semicolon, or use a paren-delimited body.
If there's an argument for matching the invocation syntax, e.g. parentheses for
an expr macro, then I think that applies more strongly to the *inner*
delimiters on the LHS, wrapping the individual argument patterns.
followed by a semicolon.
This allows code like `vec![1i, 2, 3].len();` to work.
This breaks code that uses macros as statements without putting
semicolons after them, such as:
fn main() {
...
assert!(a == b)
assert!(c == d)
println(...);
}
It also breaks code that uses macros as items without semicolons:
local_data_key!(foo)
fn main() {
println("hello world")
}
Add semicolons to fix this code. Those two examples can be fixed as
follows:
fn main() {
...
assert!(a == b);
assert!(c == d);
println(...);
}
local_data_key!(foo);
fn main() {
println("hello world")
}
RFC #378.
Closes#18635.
[breaking-change]
This change makes the compiler no longer infer whether types (structures
and enumerations) implement the `Copy` trait (and thus are implicitly
copyable). Rather, you must implement `Copy` yourself via `impl Copy for
MyType {}`.
A new warning has been added, `missing_copy_implementations`, to warn
you if a non-generic public type has been added that could have
implemented `Copy` but didn't.
For convenience, you may *temporarily* opt out of this behavior by using
`#![feature(opt_out_copy)]`. Note though that this feature gate will never be
accepted and will be removed by the time that 1.0 is released, so you should
transition your code away from using it.
This breaks code like:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
Change this code to:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
impl Copy for Point2D {}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
This is the backwards-incompatible part of #13231.
Part of RFC #3.
[breaking-change]
