Enable triagebot no-merges check
Follow-up on https://github.com/rust-lang/triagebot/pull/1704
### Motivation
Occasionally, a merge commit like cb5c011670 makes it past manual review and gets merged into master.
At one point, we tried adding a check to CI to prevent this from happening (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/105058), but that ended up [problematic](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/106319#issuecomment-1368144076) and was [reverted](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/106320). This kind of check is simply too fragile for CI, and there must be a way for a human to override the bot's decision.
The capability to detect and warn about merge commits has been present in triagebot for quite some time, but was never enabled at rust-lang/rust, possibly due to concerns about false positives on rollup and subtree sync PRs. This PR intends to alleviate those concerns.
### Configuration
This configuration will exclude rollup PRs and subtree sync PRs from merge commit detection, and it will post the default warning message and add the `has-merge-commits` and `S-waiting-on-author` labels when merge commits are detected on other PRs.
The eventual vision is to have bors refuse to merge if the `has-merge-commits` label is present. A reviewer can still force the merge by removing that label if they so wish.
### Note for contributors
The rollup tool should add that label automatically, but anyone performing subtree updates should begin including "subtree update" in the titles of those PRs, to avoid false positives.
r? infra
## Open Questions
1. This configuration uses the default message that's built into triagebot:
> There are merge commits (commits with multiple parents) in your changes. We have a [no merge policy](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/git.html#no-merge-policy) so these commits will need to be removed for this pull request to be merged.
>
> You can start a rebase with the following commands:
> ```shell-session
> $ # rebase
> $ git rebase -i master
> $ # delete any merge commits in the editor that appears
> $ git push --force-with-lease
> ```
Any changes to this are easy, I'll just have to add a `message` option. Should we mention the excluded titles in the message?
Add `Config::hash_untracked_state` callback
For context, I'm looking to use [late module passes](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_lint/context/struct.LintStore.html#structfield.late_module_passes) in Clippy which unlike regular late passes run incrementally per module
However we have a config file which can change between runs, we need changes to that to invalidate the `lint_mod` query. This PR adds a side channel for us to hash some extra state into `Options` in order to do that
This does not make any changes to Clippy, I plan to do that in a PR to the Clippy repo along with some other required changes
An alternative implementation would be to add a new query to track this state and override the `lint_mod` query in Clippy to first call that
cc `@rust-lang/clippy`
[`unnecessary_lazy_eval`]: reduce applicability if closure has return type annotation
Fixes#11672
We already check if closure parameters don't have type annotations and reduce the applicability to `MaybeIncorrect` if they do, since those help type inference and removing them breaks code. We didn't do this for return type annotations however. This PR adds it. This doesn't change it to produce a fix that will compile, but it will prevent rustfix from auto-applying it.
(In general I'm not sure if we can suggest a fix that will compile. In this specific example, it might be possible to suggest `&[] as &[u8]`, but as-casts won't always work, e.g. `Default::default() as &[u8]` is a compile error, so just reducing applicability should be a safe fix in any case for now)
changelog: [`unnecessary_lazy_eval`]: reduce applicability to `MaybeIncorrect` if closure has return type annotation
changelog: Now `declare_interior_mutable_const` and `borrow_interior_mutable_const` respect the `ignore-interior-mutability` configuration entry
Signed-off-by: slinkydeveloper <francescoguard@gmail.com>
don't UB on dangling ptr deref, instead check inbounds on projections
This implements https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1387 in Miri. See that PR for what the change is about.
Detecting dangling references in `let x = &...;` is now done by validity checking only, so some tests need to have validity checking enabled. There is no longer inherently a "nodangle" check in evaluating the expression `&*ptr` (aside from the aliasing model).
r? `@oli-obk`
Based on:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1387
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115524
interpret: clean up AllocBytes
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/issues/2836
Nothing has moved here in half a year, so let's just remove these unused stubs -- they need a proper re-design anyway.
r? `@oli-obk`
Interacting with `basic_coverage_blocks` directly makes it easier to satisfy
the borrow checker when mutating `pending_dups` while reading other fields.
Rollup of 3 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #115196 (Suggest adding `return` if the for semi which can coerce to the fn return type)
- #115955 (Stabilize `{IpAddr, Ipv6Addr}::to_canonical`)
- #116776 (Enable `review-requested` feature for rustbot)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
triagebot: re-enable merge commit check
https://github.com/rust-lang/triagebot/pull/1720 has landed.
Also make the keyword "Rustup", which is what we've been already using for such PRs for a while. Just adjust the bot to also put that in the title.
Stabilize `{IpAddr, Ipv6Addr}::to_canonical`
Make `IpAddr::to_canonical` and `IpV6Addr::to_canonical` stable (+const), as well as const stabilize `Ipv6Addr::to_ipv4_mapped`.
Newly stable API:
```rust
impl IpAddr {
// Newly stable under `ip_to_canonical`
const fn to_canonical(&self) -> IpAddr;
}
impl Ipv6Addr {
// Newly stable under `ip_to_canonical`
const fn to_canonical(&self) -> IpAddr;
// Already stable, this makes it const stable under
// `const_ipv6_to_ipv4_mapped`
const fn to_ipv4_mapped(&self) -> Option<Ipv4Addr>
}
```
These stabilize a subset of the following tracking issues:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/27709
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76205
Stabilization of all methods under the `ip` gate was attempted once at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/66584 then again at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/76098. These were not successful because there are still unknowns about `is_documentation` `is_benchmarking` and similar; `to_canonical` is much more straightforward.
I have looked and could not find any known issues with `to_canonical`. These were added in 2021 in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87708
cc implementor ``@the8472``
r? libs-api
``@rustbot`` label +T-libs-api +needs-fcp
Inline `Bytes::next` and `Bytes::size_hint`.
This greatly increases its speed. On one small test program using `Bytes::next` to iterate over a large file, execution time dropped from ~330ms to ~220ms.
r? `@the8472`
impl Default for ExitCode
As suggested here
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/106425#issuecomment-1382952598
Needs FCP since this is an insta-stable impl.
Ideally we would have `impl From<ExitCode> for ExitStatus` and implement the default `ExitStatus` using that. That is sadly not so easy because of the various strange confusions about `ExitCode` (unix: exit status) vs `ExitStatus` (unix: wait status) in the not-really-unix platforms in `library//src/sys/unix/process`. I'll try to follow that up.
This configuration will exclude rollup PRs and subtree sync PRs from
merge commit detection. On other PRs, it will post the default warning
message and add the `has-merge-commits` and `S-waiting-on-author`
labels when merge commits are detected.
The eventual vision is to have bors refuse to merge if the
`has-merge-commits` label is present. A reviewer can still
force the merge by removing that label if they so wish.
[`get_first`]: lint on non-primitive slices
Fixes#11594
I left the issue open for a couple days before making the PR to see if anyone has something to say, but it looks like there aren't any objections to removing this check that prevented linting on non-primitive slices, so here's the PR now.
There's a couple of instances in clippy itself where we now emit the lint. The actual relevant change is in the first commit and fixing the `.get(0)` instances in clippy itself is in the 2nd commit.
changelog: [`get_first`]: lint on non-primitive slices
impl Not, Bit{And,Or}{,Assign} for IP addresses
ACP: rust-lang/libs-team#235
Note: since these are insta-stable, these require an FCP.
Implements, where `N` is either `4` or `6`:
```rust
impl Not for IpvNAddr
impl Not for &IpvNAddr
impl BitAnd<IpvNAddr> for IpvNAddr
impl BitAnd<&IpvNAddr> for IpvNAddr
impl BitAnd<IpvNAddr> for &IpvNAddr
impl BitAnd<&IpvNAddr> for &IpvNAddr
impl BitAndAssign<IpvNAddr> for IpvNAddr
impl BitAndAssign<&IpvNAddr> for IpvNAddr
impl BitOr<IpvNAddr> for IpvNAddr
impl BitOr<&IpvNAddr> for IpvNAddr
impl BitOr<IpvNAddr> for &IpvNAddr
impl BitOr<&IpvNAddr> for &IpvNAddr
impl BitOrAssign<IpvNAddr> for IpvNAddr
impl BitOrAssign<&IpvNAddr> for IpvNAddr
```
It's a better name, and lets "active features" refer to the features
that are active in a particular program, due to being declared or
enabled by the edition.
The commit also renames `Features::enabled` as `Features::active` to
match this; I changed my mind and have decided that "active" is a little
better thatn "enabled" for this, particularly because a number of
pre-existing comments use "active" in this way.
Finally, the commit renames `Status::Stable` as `Status::Accepted`, to
match `ACCEPTED_FEATURES`.
`State` is used to distinguish active vs accepted vs removed features.
However, these can also be distinguished by their location, in
`ACTIVE_FEATURES`, `ACCEPTED_FEATURES`, and `REMOVED_FEATURES`.
So this commit removes `State` and moves the internals of its variants
next to the `Feature` in each element of `*_FEATURES`, introducing new
types `ActiveFeature` and `RemovedFeature`. (There is no need for
`AcceptedFeature` because `State::Accepted` had no fields.)
This is a tighter type representation, avoids the need for some runtime
checks, and makes the code a bit shorter.
