Point to type argument span when used as trait
Given the following code:
``` rust
struct Foo<T: Clone>(T);
use std::ops::Add;
impl<T: Clone, Add> Add for Foo<T> {
type Output = usize;
fn add(self, rhs: Self) -> Self::Output {
unimplemented!();
}
}
```
present the following output:
``` nocode
error[E0404]: `Add` is not a trait
--> file3.rs:5:21
|
5 | impl<T: Clone, Add> Add for Okok<T> {
| --- ^^^ expected trait, found type parameter
| |
| type parameter defined here
```
Fixes#35987.
Replace FNV with a faster hash function.
Hash table lookups are very hot in rustc profiles and the time taken within `FnvHash` itself is a big part of that. Although FNV is a simple hash, it processes its input one byte at a time. In contrast, Firefox has a homespun hash function that is also simple but works on multiple bytes at a time. So I tried it out and the results are compelling:
```
futures-rs-test 4.326s vs 4.212s --> 1.027x faster (variance: 1.001x, 1.007x)
helloworld 0.233s vs 0.232s --> 1.004x faster (variance: 1.037x, 1.016x)
html5ever-2016- 5.397s vs 5.210s --> 1.036x faster (variance: 1.009x, 1.006x)
hyper.0.5.0 5.018s vs 4.905s --> 1.023x faster (variance: 1.007x, 1.006x)
inflate-0.1.0 4.889s vs 4.872s --> 1.004x faster (variance: 1.012x, 1.007x)
issue-32062-equ 0.347s vs 0.335s --> 1.035x faster (variance: 1.033x, 1.019x)
issue-32278-big 1.717s vs 1.622s --> 1.059x faster (variance: 1.027x, 1.028x)
jld-day15-parse 1.537s vs 1.459s --> 1.054x faster (variance: 1.005x, 1.003x)
piston-image-0. 11.863s vs 11.482s --> 1.033x faster (variance: 1.060x, 1.002x)
regex.0.1.30 2.517s vs 2.453s --> 1.026x faster (variance: 1.011x, 1.013x)
rust-encoding-0 2.080s vs 2.047s --> 1.016x faster (variance: 1.005x, 1.005x)
syntex-0.42.2 32.268s vs 31.275s --> 1.032x faster (variance: 1.014x, 1.022x)
syntex-0.42.2-i 17.629s vs 16.559s --> 1.065x faster (variance: 1.013x, 1.021x)
```
(That's a stage1 compiler doing debug builds. Results for a stage2 compiler are similar.)
The attached commit is not in a state suitable for landing because I changed the implementation of FnvHasher without changing its name (because that would have required touching many lines in the compiler). Nonetheless, it is a good place to start discussions.
Profiles show very clearly that this new hash function is a lot faster to compute than FNV. The quality of the new hash function is less clear -- it seems to do better in some cases and worse in others (judging by the number of instructions executed in `Hash{Map,Set}::get`).
CC @brson, @arthurprs
Given the following code:
```rust
struct Foo<T: Clone>(T);
use std::ops::Add;
impl<T: Clone, Add> Add for Foo<T> {
type Output = usize;
fn add(self, rhs: Self) -> Self::Output {
unimplemented!();
}
}
```
present the following output:
```nocode
error[E0404]: `Add` is not a trait
--> file3.rs:5:21
|
5 | impl<T: Clone, Add> Add for Okok<T> {
| --- ^^^ expected trait, found type parameter
| |
| type parameter defined here
```
Stabilize `..` in tuple (struct) patterns
I'd like to nominate `..` in tuple and tuple struct patterns for stabilization.
This feature is a relatively small extension to existing stable functionality and doesn't have known blockers.
The feature first appeared in Rust 1.10 6 months ago.
An example of use: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/36203
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/33627
r? @nikomatsakis
Add semicolon to "Maybe a missing `extern crate foo`" message
I had it a couple of times that I was missing the "extern crate" line
after I introduced a new dependency. So I copied the text from the
message and inserted it into the beginning of my code, only to find the
compiler complaining that I was missing the semicolon. (I forgot to add
it after the text that I had pasted.)
There's a similar message which does include the semicolon, namely
"help: you can import it into scope: `use foo::Bar;`". I think the two
messages should be consistent, so this change adds it for "extern
crate".
Diagnostics for struct path resolution errors in resolve and typeck are unified.
Self type is treated as a type alias in few places (not reachable yet).
Unsafe cell is seen in constants even through type aliases.
All checks for struct paths in typeck work on type level.
I had it a couple of times that I was missing the "extern crate" line
after I introduced a new dependency. So I copied the text from the
message and inserted it into the beginning of my code, only to find the
compiler complaining that I was missing the semicolon. (I forgot to add
it after the text that I had pasted.)
There's a similar message which does include the semicolon, namely
"help: you can import it into scope: `use foo::Bar;`". I think the two
messages should be consistent, so this change adds it for "extern
crate".
macros 1.1: future proofing and cleanup
This PR
- uses the macro namespace for custom derives (instead of a dedicated custom derive namespace),
- relaxes the shadowing rules for `#[macro_use]`-imported custom derives to match the shadowing rules for ordinary `#[macro_use]`-imported macros, and
- treats custom derive `extern crate`s like empty modules so that we can eventually allow, for example, `extern crate serde_derive; use serde_derive::Serialize;` backwards compatibly.
r? @alexcrichton
Changed error message E0408 to new format
Followed your text and was able to change the ouput to the new format.
I did not encounter any broken test therefore this is a really small commit.
Thanks for letting me hack on the compiler :)
r? @jonathandturner
macros: clean up scopes of expanded `#[macro_use]` imports
This PR changes the scope of macro-expanded `#[macro_use]` imports to match that of unexpanded `#[macro_use]` imports. For example, this would be allowed:
```rust
example!();
macro_rules! m { () => { #[macro_use(example)] extern crate example_crate; } }
m!();
```
This PR also enforces the full shadowing restrictions from RFC 1560 on `#[macro_use]` imports (currently, we only enforce the weakened restrictions from #36767).
This is a [breaking-change], but I believe it is highly unlikely to cause breakage in practice.
r? @nrc
Enforce the shadowing restrictions from RFC 1560 for today's macros
This PR enforces a weakened version of the shadowing restrictions from RFC 1560. More specifically,
- If a macro expansion contains a `macro_rules!` macro definition that is used outside of the expansion, the defined macro may not shadow an existing macro.
- If a macro expansion contains a `#[macro_use] extern crate` macro import that is used outside of the expansion, the imported macro may not shadow an existing macro.
This is a [breaking-change]. For example,
```rust
macro_rules! m { () => {} }
macro_rules! n { () => {
macro_rules! m { () => {} } //< This shadows an existing macro.
m!(); //< This is inside the expansion that generated `m`'s definition, so it is OK.
} }
n!();
m!(); //< This use of `m` is outside the expansion, so it causes the shadowing to be an error.
```
r? @nrc
