const-eval: make misalignment a hard error
It's been a future-incompat error (showing up in cargo's reports) since https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/104616, Rust 1.68, released in March. That should be long enough.
The question for the lang team is simply -- should we move ahead with this, making const-eval alignment failures a hard error? (It turns out some of them accidentally already were hard errors since #104616. But not all so this is still a breaking change. Crater found no regression.)
Detect ruby-style closure in parser
When parsing a closure without a body that is surrounded by a block, suggest moving the opening brace after the closure head.
Fix#116608.
On type error involving closure, avoid ICE
When we encounter a type error involving a closure, we try to typeck prior closure invocations to see if they influenced the current expected type. When trying to do so, ensure that the closure was defined in our current scope.
Fix#116658.
Improve check-cfg diagnostics
This PR tries to improve some of the diagnostics of check-cfg.
The main changes is the unexpected name or value being added to the main diagnostic:
```diff
- warning: unexpected `cfg` condition name
+ warning: unexpected `cfg` condition name: `widnows`
```
It also cherry-pick the better sensible logic for when we print the list of expected values when we have a matching value for a very similar name.
Address https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111072#discussion_r1356818100
r? `@petrochenkov`
When we encounter a type error involving a closure, we try to typeck
prior closure invocations to see if they influenced the current expected
type. When trying to do so, ensure that the closure was defined in our
current scope.
Fix#116658.
exhaustiveness: Rework constructor splitting
`SplitWildcard` was pretty opaque. I replaced it with a more legible abstraction: `ConstructorSet` represents the set of constructors for patterns of a given type. This clarifies responsibilities: `ConstructorSet` handles one clear task, and diagnostic-related shenanigans can be done separately.
I'm quite excited, I had has this in mind for years but could never quite introduce it. This opens up possibilities, including type-specific optimisations (like using a `FxHashSet` to collect enum variants, which had been [hackily attempted some years ago](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/76918)), my one-pass rewrite (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116042), and future librarification.
Copy 1-element arrays as scalars, not vectors
For `[T; 1]` it's silly to copy as `<1 x T>` when we can just copy as `T`.
Inspired by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/101210#issuecomment-1732470941, which pointed out that `Option<[u8; 1]>` was codegenning worse than `Option<u8>`.
(I'm not sure *why* LLVM doesn't optimize out `<1 x u8>`, but might as well just not emit it in the first place in this codepath.)
---
I think I bit off too much in #116479; let me try just the scalar case first.
r? `@ghost`
Handle several `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes correctly
This PR fixes an issues where rustc would ignore subsequent `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes. The [corresponding RFC](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3368-diagnostic-attribute-namespace.html) specifies that the first matching instance of each option is used. Invalid attributes are linted and otherwise ignored.
Show enum discriminant if a compatible repr is used
Follow-up of #116142.
It was mentioned in the [team meeting](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/393423-t-rustdoc.2Fmeetings/topic/meeting.2002-10-2023/near/394504024) that an enum with a `repr` should also get its discriminants displayed. Forgot to implement it in #116142...
It also allowed to uncover a bug: i was not providing the correct `DefId` in case it was a type alias to `render_enum_fields`. It's also fixed in this PR.
r? `@fmease`
Use structured suggestion for #113174
When encountering a for loop that is rejected by the borrow checker because it is being advanced within its body, provide a structured suggestion for `while let Some(pat) = iter.next()`.
This PR fixes an issues where rustc would ignore subsequent
`#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes. The [corresponding
RFC](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3368-diagnostic-attribute-namespace.html)
specifies that the first matching instance of each option is used.
Invalid attributes are linted and otherwise ignored.
When encountering a for loop that is rejected by the borrow checker
because it is being advanced within its body, provide a structured
suggestion for `while let Some(pat) = iter.next()`.
Prevent showing methods from blanket impls of not available foreign traits to show up in the search results
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/115480.
In the case that the blanket impl trait is not available in the current crate, we prevent adding its methods in the search index.
Now how I found how to fix the issue: the `equivalent` method is not generated in the documentation pages but was still added to the search index. To render impls, we iterate over `cache.impls` so I took a look at how this was generated. Inside `formats/cache.rs`, we have `CacheBuilder::populate` where we push impls into `impls` but with this condition:
```rust
if cx.cache.traits.contains_key(&trait_did) {
```
I re-used this condition in `CacheBuilder::fold_item` to prevent this method from being added in `cache.search_index` or `cache.orphan_impl_items`.
PS: If you want to double-check if the added test works, just comment the code I added in `cache.rs` and it should fail.
r? ``@notriddle``
Relate alias ty with variance
In the new solver, turns out that the subst-relate branch of the alias-relate predicate was relating args invariantly even for opaques, which have variance 💀.
This change is a bit more invasive, but I'd rather not special-case it [here](aeaa5c30e5/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/solve/alias_relate.rs (L171-L190)) and then have it break elsewhere. I'm doing a perf run to see if the extra call to `def_kind` is that expensive, if it is, I'll reconsider.
r? ``@lcnr``
Implement `-Clink-self-contained=-linker` opt out
This implements the `-Clink-self-contained` opt out necessary to switch to lld by changing rustc's defaults instead of cargo's.
Components that are enabled and disabled on the CLI are recorded, for the purpose of being merged with the ones which the target spec will declare (I'll open another PR for that tomorrow, for easier review).
For MCP510, we now check whether using the self-contained linker is disabled on the CLI. Right now it would only be sensible to with `-Zgcc-ld=lld` (and I'll add some checks that we don't both enable and disable a component on the CLI in a future PR), but the goal is to simplify adding the check of the target's enabled components here in the follow-up PRs.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Fix overflow checking in range patterns
When a range pattern contains an overflowing literal, if we're not careful we might not notice the overflow and use the wrapped value. This makes for confusing error messages because linting against overflowing literals is only done in a later pass. So when a range is invalid we check for overflows to provide a better error.
This check didn't use to handle negative types; this PR fixes that. First commit adds tests, second cleans up without changing behavior, third does the fix.
EDIT: while I was at it, I fixed a small annoyance about the span of the overflow lint on negated literals.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/94239
Also consider call and yield as MIR SSA.
The SSA analysis on MIR only considered `Assign` statements as defining a SSA local.
This PR adds assignments as part of a `Call` or `Yield` terminator in that category.
This mainly allows to perform CopyProp on a call return place.
The only subtlety is in the dominance property: the assignment is only complete at the beginning of the target block.
On type error of closure call argument, point at earlier calls that affected inference
Mitigate part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71209.
When we encounter a type error on a specific argument of a closure call argument, where the closure's definition doesn't have a type specified, look for other calls of the closure to try and find the specific call that cased that argument to be inferred of the expected type.
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/unboxed-closures-type-mismatch.rs:30:18
|
LL | identity(1u16);
| -------- ^^^^ expected `u8`, found `u16`
| |
| arguments to this function are incorrect
|
note: expected because the closure was earlier called with an argument of type `u8`
--> $DIR/unboxed-closures-type-mismatch.rs:29:18
|
LL | identity(1u8);
| -------- ^^^ expected because this argument is of type `u8`
| |
| in this closure call
note: closure parameter defined here
--> $DIR/unboxed-closures-type-mismatch.rs:28:25
|
LL | let identity = |x| x;
| ^
help: change the type of the numeric literal from `u16` to `u8`
|
LL | identity(1u8);
| ~~
```
rustdoc-search: add impl disambiguator to duplicate assoc items
Preview (to see the difference, click the link and pay attention to the specific function that comes up):
| Before | After |
|--|--|
| [`simd<i64>, simd<i64> -> simd<i64>`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/?search=simd%3Ci64%3E%2C%20simd%3Ci64%3E%20-%3E%20simd%3Ci64%3E) | [`simd<i64>, simd<i64> -> simd<i64>`](https://notriddle.com/rustdoc-demo-html-3/impl-disambiguate-search/std/index.html?search=simd%3Ci64%3E%2C%20simd%3Ci64%3E%20-%3E%20simd%3Ci64%3E) |
| [`cow, vec -> bool`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/?search=cow%2C%20vec%20-%3E%20bool) | [`cow, vec -> bool`](https://notriddle.com/rustdoc-demo-html-3/impl-disambiguate-search/std/index.html?search=cow%2C%20vec%20-%3E%20bool)
Helps with #90929
This changes the search results, specifically, when there's more than one impl with an associated item with the same name. For example, the search queries `simd<i8> -> simd<i8>` and `simd<i64> -> simd<i64>` don't link to the same function, but most of the functions have the same names.
This change should probably be FCP-ed, especially since it adds a new anchor link format for `main.js` to handle, so that URLs like `struct.Vec.html#impl-AsMut<[T]>-for-Vec<T,+A>/method.as_mut` redirect to `struct.Vec.html#method.as_mut-2`. It's a strange design, but there are a few reasons for it:
* I'd like to avoid making the HTML bigger. Obviously, fixing this bug is going to add at least a little more data to the search index, but adding more HTML penalises viewers for the benefit of searchers.
* Breaking `struct.Vec.html#method.len` would also be a disappointment.
On the other hand:
* The path-style anchors might be less prone to link rot than the numbered anchors. It's definitely less likely to have URLs that appear to "work", but silently point at the wrong thing.
* This commit arranges the path-style anchor to redirect to the numbered anchor. Nothing stops rustdoc from doing the opposite, making path-style anchors the default and redirecting the "legacy" numbered ones.
### The bug
On the "Before" links, this example search calls for `i64`:
But if I click any of the results, I get `f64` instead.
The PR fixes this problem by adding enough information to the search result `href` to disambiguate methods with different types but the same name.
More detailed description of the problem at:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/109422#issuecomment-1491089293
> When a struct/enum/union has multiple impls with different type parameters, it can have multiple methods that have the same name, but which are on different impls. Besides Simd, [Any](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/any/trait.Any.html?search=any%3A%3Adowncast) also demonstrates this pattern. It has three methods named `downcast`, on three different impls.
>
> When that happens, it presents a challenge in linking to the method. Normally we link like `#method.foo`. When there are multiple `foo`, we number them like `#method.foo`, `#method.foo-1`, `#method.foo-2`, etc.
>
> It also presents a challenge for our search code. Currently we store all the variants in the index, but don’t have any way to generate unambiguous URLs in the results page, or to distinguish them in the SERP.
>
> To fix this, we need three things:
>
> 1. A fragment format that fully specifies the impl type parameters when needed to disambiguate (`#impl-SimdOrd-for-Simd<i64,+LANES>/method.simd_max`)
> 2. A search index that stores methods with enough information to disambiguate the impl they were on.
> 3. A search results interface that can display multiple methods on the same type with the same name, when appropriate OR a disambiguation landing section on item pages?
>
> For reviewers: it can be hard to see the new fragment format in action since it immediately gets rewritten to the numbered form.
Improve handling of assertion failures with very long conditions
It's not perfectly clear what the best behaviour is here, but I think this is an improvement.
r? `@matthewjasper`
cc `@m-ou-se`
The assertion in `assert-long-condition.rs` used to be fail like this, all on
one line:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18\n + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0', tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5
```
The `\n` and subsequent indent is because the condition is pretty-printed, and
the pretty-printer inserts a newline. Printing the newline in this way is
arguably reasonable given that the message appears within single quotes, which
is very similar to a string literal.
However, after the assertion printing improvements that were released in 1.73,
the assertion now fails like this:
```
thread 'main' panicked at tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5:
assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18\n + 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0
```
Now that there are no single quotes around the pretty-printed condition, the
`\n` is quite strange.
This commit gets rid of the `\n`, by removing the `escape_debug` done on the
pretty-printed message. This results in the following:
```
thread 'main' panicked at tests/ui/macros/assert-long-condition.rs:7:5:
assertion failed: 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 + 18
+ 19 + 20 + 21 + 22 + 23 + 24 + 25 == 0
```
The overly-large indent is still strange, but that's a separate pretty-printing issue.
This change helps with #108341.
