Fixup missing renames from `#[main]` to `#[rustc_main]`
In #84217 `#[main]` was removed and replaced with `#[rustc_main]`. In some places the rename was forgotten, which makes the current code confusing, because at first glance it seems that `#[main]` is still around. Perform the renames also in these places.
I noticed this (after first being confused by it) when working on #97802.
r? `@petrochenkov`
(since you reviewed the other PR)
In fc357039f9 `#[main]` was removed and replaced with `#[rustc_main]`.
In some place the rename was forgotten, which makes the current code
confusing, because at first glance it seems that `#[main]` is still
around. Perform the renames also in these places.
proc_macro: don't pass a client-side function pointer through the server.
Before this PR, `proc_macro::bridge::Client<F>` contained both:
* the C ABI entry-point `run`, that the server can call to start the client
* some "payload" `f: F` passed to that entry-point
* in practice, this was always a (client-side Rust ABI) `fn` pointer to the actual function the proc macro author wrote, i.e. `#[proc_macro] fn foo(input: TokenStream) -> TokenStream`
In other words, the client was passing one of its (Rust) `fn` pointers to the server, which was passing it back to the client, for the client to call (see later below for why that was ever needed).
I was inspired by `@nnethercote's` attempt to remove the `get_handle_counters` field from `Client` (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97004#issuecomment-1139273301), which combined with removing the `f` ("payload") field, could theoretically allow for a `#[repr(transparent)]` `Client` that mostly just newtypes the C ABI entry-point `fn` pointer <sub>(and in the context of e.g. wasm isolation, that's *all* you want, since you can reason about it from outside the wasm VM, as just a 32-bit "function table index", that you can pass to the wasm VM to call that function)</sub>.
<hr/>
So this PR removes that "payload". But it's not a simple refactor: the reason the field existed in the first place is because monomorphizing over a function type doesn't let you call the function without having a value of that type, because function types don't implement anything like `Default`, i.e.:
```rust
extern "C" fn ffi_wrapper<A, R, F: Fn(A) -> R>(arg: A) -> R {
let f: F = ???; // no way to get a value of `F`
f(arg)
}
```
That could be solved with something like this, if it was allowed:
```rust
extern "C" fn ffi_wrapper<
A, R,
F: Fn(A) -> R,
const f: F // not allowed because the type is a generic param
>(arg: A) -> R {
f(arg)
}
```
Instead, this PR contains a workaround in `proc_macro::bridge::selfless_reify` (see its module-level comment for more details) that can provide something similar to the `ffi_wrapper` example above, but limited to `F` being `Copy` and ZST (and requiring an `F` value to prove the caller actually can create values of `F` and it's not uninhabited or some other unsound situation).
<hr/>
Hopefully this time we don't have a performance regression, and this has a chance to land.
cc `@mystor` `@bjorn3`
Begin fixing all the broken doctests in `compiler/`
Begins to fix#95994.
All of them pass now but 24 of them I've marked with `ignore HELP (<explanation>)` (asking for help) as I'm unsure how to get them to work / if we should leave them as they are.
There are also a few that I marked `ignore` that could maybe be made to work but seem less important.
Each `ignore` has a rough "reason" for ignoring after it parentheses, with
- `(pseudo-rust)` meaning "mostly rust-like but contains foreign syntax"
- `(illustrative)` a somewhat catchall for either a fragment of rust that doesn't stand on its own (like a lone type), or abbreviated rust with ellipses and undeclared types that would get too cluttered if made compile-worthy.
- `(not-rust)` stuff that isn't rust but benefits from the syntax highlighting, like MIR.
- `(internal)` uses `rustc_*` code which would be difficult to make work with the testing setup.
Those reason notes are a bit inconsistently applied and messy though. If that's important I can go through them again and try a more principled approach. When I run `rg '```ignore \(' .` on the repo, there look to be lots of different conventions other people have used for this sort of thing. I could try unifying them all if that would be helpful.
I'm not sure if there was a better existing way to do this but I wrote my own script to help me run all the doctests and wade through the output. If that would be useful to anyone else, I put it here: https://github.com/Elliot-Roberts/rust_doctest_fixing_tool
Add a new Rust attribute to support embedding debugger visualizers
Implemented [this RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3191) to add support for embedding debugger visualizers into a PDB.
Added a new attribute `#[debugger_visualizer]` and updated the `CrateMetadata` to store debugger visualizers for crate dependencies.
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3191
Cleanup `DebuggerVisualizerFile` type and other minor cleanup of queries.
Merge the queries for debugger visualizers into a single query.
Revert move of `resolve_path` to `rustc_builtin_macros`. Update dependencies in Cargo.toml for `rustc_passes`.
Respond to PR comments. Load visualizer files into opaque bytes `Vec<u8>`. Debugger visualizers for dynamically linked crates should not be embedded in the current crate.
Update the unstable book with the new feature. Add the tracking issue for the debugger_visualizer feature.
Respond to PR comments and minor cleanups.
Change `span_suggestion` (and variants) to take `impl ToString` rather
than `String` for the suggested code, as this simplifies the
requirements on the diagnostic derive.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Implement sym operands for global_asm!
Tracking issue: #93333
This PR is pretty much a complete rewrite of `sym` operand support for inline assembly so that the same implementation can be shared by `asm!` and `global_asm!`. The main changes are:
- At the AST level, `sym` is represented as a special `InlineAsmSym` AST node containing a path instead of an `Expr`.
- At the HIR level, `sym` is split into `SymStatic` and `SymFn` depending on whether the path resolves to a static during AST lowering (defaults to `SynFn` if `get_early_res` fails).
- `SymFn` is just an `AnonConst`. It runs through typeck and we just collect the resulting type at the end. An error is emitted if the type is not a `FnDef`.
- `SymStatic` directly holds a path and the `DefId` of the `static` that it is pointing to.
- The representation at the MIR level is mostly unchanged. There is a minor change to THIR where `SymFn` is a constant instead of an expression.
- At the codegen level we need to apply the target's symbol mangling to the result of `tcx.symbol_name()` depending on the target. This is done by calling the LLVM name mangler, which handles all of the details.
- On Mach-O, all symbols have a leading underscore.
- On x86 Windows, different mangling is used for cdecl, stdcall, fastcall and vectorcall.
- No mangling is needed on other platforms.
r? `@nagisa`
cc `@eddyb`
Create (unstable) 2024 edition
[On Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/213817-t-lang/topic/Deprecating.20macro.20scoping.20shenanigans/near/272860652), there was a small aside regarding creating the 2024 edition now as opposed to later. There was a reasonable amount of support and no stated opposition.
This change creates the 2024 edition in the compiler and creates a prelude for the 2024 edition. There is no current difference between the 2021 and 2024 editions. Cargo and other tools will need to be updated separately, as it's not in the same repository. This change permits the vast majority of work towards the next edition to proceed _now_ instead of waiting until 2024.
For sanity purposes, I've merged the "hello" UI tests into a single file with multiple revisions. Otherwise we'd end up with a file per edition, despite them being essentially identical.
````@rustbot```` label +T-lang +S-waiting-on-review
Not sure on the relevant team, to be honest.
Stabilize `derive_default_enum`
This stabilizes `#![feature(derive_default_enum)]`, as proposed in [RFC 3107](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3107) and tracked in #87517. In short, it permits you to `#[derive(Default)]` on `enum`s, indicating what the default should be by placing a `#[default]` attribute on the desired variant (which must be a unit variant in the interest of forward compatibility).
```````@rustbot``````` label +S-waiting-on-review +T-lang
refactor: simplify few string related interactions
Few small optimizations:
check_doc_keyword: don't alloc string for emptiness check
check_doc_alias_value: get argument as Symbol to prevent needless string convertions
check_doc_attrs: don't alloc vec, iterate over slice.
replace as_str() check with symbol check
get_single_str_from_tts: don't prealloc string
trivial string to str replace
LifetimeScopeForPath::NonElided use Vec<Symbol> instead of Vec<String>
AssertModuleSource use FxHashSet<Symbol> instead of BTreeSet<String>
CrateInfo.crate_name replace FxHashMap<CrateNum, String> with FxHashMap<CrateNum, Symbol>
check_doc_alias_value: get argument as Symbol to prevent needless string convertions
check_doc_attrs: don't alloc vec, iterate over slice. Vec introduced in #83149, but no perf run posted on merge
replace as_str() check with symbol check
get_single_str_from_tts: don't prealloc string
trivial string to str replace
LifetimeScopeForPath::NonElided use Vec<Symbol> instead of Vec<String>
AssertModuleSource use BTreeSet<Symbol> instead of BTreeSet<String>
CrateInfo.crate_name replace FxHashMap<CrateNum, String> with FxHashMap<CrateNum, Symbol>
`MultiSpan` contains labels, which are more complicated with the
introduction of diagnostic translation and will use types from
`rustc_errors` - however, `rustc_errors` depends on `rustc_span` so
`rustc_span` cannot use types like `DiagnosticMessage` without
dependency cycles. Introduce a new `rustc_error_messages` crate that can
contain `DiagnosticMessage` and `MultiSpan`.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
More robust fallback for `use` suggestion
Our old way to suggest where to add `use`s would first look for pre-existing `use`s in the relevant crate/module, and if there are *no* uses, it would fallback on trying to use another item as the basis for the suggestion.
But this was fragile, as illustrated in issue #87613
This PR instead identifies span of the first token after any inner attributes, and uses *that* as the fallback for the `use` suggestion.
Fix#87613
then we just suggest the first legal position where you could inject a use.
To do this, I added `inject_use_span` field to `ModSpans`, and populate it in
parser (it is the span of the first token found after inner attributes, if any).
Then I rewrote the use-suggestion code to utilize it, and threw out some stuff
that is now unnecessary with this in place. (I think the result is easier to
understand.)
Then I added a test of issue 87613.
Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint
This pull-request improve the allowness (`#[allow(...)]`) of the `unexpected_cfgs` lint.
Before this PR only crate level `#![allow(unexpected_cfgs)]` worked, now with this PR it also work when put around `cfg!` or if it is in a upper level. Making it work ~for the attributes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, ...~ for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.
Found while working on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/94298.
r? ````````@petrochenkov````````
