Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #105019 (Add parentheses properly for borrowing suggestion)
- #106001 (Stop at the first `NULL` argument when iterating `argv`)
- #107098 (Suggest function call on pattern type mismatch)
- #107490 (rustdoc: remove inconsistently-present sidebar tooltips)
- #107855 (Add a couple random projection tests for new solver)
- #107857 (Add ui test for implementation on projection)
- #107878 (Clarify `new_size` for realloc means bytes)
- #107888 (revert #107074, add regression test)
- #107900 (Zero the `REPARSE_MOUNTPOINT_DATA_BUFFER` header)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Implement `deferred_projection_equality` for erica solver
Somewhat of a revival of #96912. When relating projections now emit an `AliasEq` obligation instead of attempting to determine equality of projections that may not be as normalized as possible (i.e. because of lazy norm, or just containing inference variables that prevent us from resolving an impl). Only do this when the new solver is enabled
Add ui test for implementation on projection
The error in full can be seen in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107263 and is part of why the PR is blocked (it still requires the approval from the team for supporting it).
r? ``@oli-obk``
Add a couple random projection tests for new solver
Self-explanatory, they're just some cases that have been on my mind in the past (especially `tests/ui/traits/new-solver/param-candidate-doesnt-shadow-project.rs`).
Mir-Opt for copying enums with large discrepancies
I have been meaning to make this for quite a while, based off of this [hackmd](https://hackmd.io/`@ft4bxUsFT5CEUBmRKYHr7w/rJM8BBPzD).`
I'm not sure where to put this opt now that I've made it, so I'd appreciate suggestions on that!
It's also one long chain of statements, not sure if there's a more friendly format to make it.
r? `@tmiasko`
I would `r` oli but he's on leave so he suggested I `r` tmiasko or wesleywiser.
Avoid exposing type parameters and implementation details sourced from macro expansions
Fixes#107745.
~~I would like to **request some guidance** for this issue, because I don't think this is a good fix (a band-aid at best).~~
### The Problem
The code
```rust
fn main() {
println!("{:?}", []);
}
```
gets desugared into (`rustc +nightly --edition=2018 issue-107745.rs -Z unpretty=hir`):
```rust
#[prelude_import]
use std::prelude::rust_2018::*;
#[macro_use]
extern crate std;
fn main() {
{
::std::io::_print(<#[lang = "format_arguments"]>::new_v1(&["",
"\n"], &[<#[lang = "format_argument"]>::new_debug(&[])]));
};
}
```
so the diagnostics code tries to be as specific and helpful as possible, and I think it finds that `[]` needs a type parameter and so does `new_debug`. But since `[]` doesn't have an origin for the type parameter definition, it points to `new_debug` instead and leaks the internal implementation detail since all `[]` has is an type inference variable.
### ~~The Bad Fix~~
~~This PR currently tries to fix the problem by bypassing the generated function `<#[lang = "format_argument"]>::new_debug` to avoid its generic parameter (I think it is auto-generated from the argument `[_; 0]`?) from getting collected as an `InsertableGenericArg`. This is problematic because it also prevents the help from getting displayed.~~
~~I think this fix is not ideal and hard-codes the format generated code pattern, but I can't think of a better fix. I have tried asking on Zulip but no responses there yet.~~
Fix implied outlives bounds logic for projections
The logic here is subtly wrong. I put a bit of an explanation in a767d7b5165cea8ee5cbe494a4a636c50ef67c9c.
TL;DR: we register outlives predicates to be proved, because wf code normalizes projections (from the unnormalized types) to type variables. This causes us to register those as constraints instead of implied. This was "fine", because we later added that implied bound in the normalized type, and delayed registering constraints. When I went to cleanup `free_region_relations` to *not* delay adding constraints, this bug was uncovered.
cc. `@aliemjay` because this caused your test failure in #99832 (I only realized as I was writing this)
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Implement some tweaks in the new solver
I've been testing the new solver on some small codebases, and these are a few small changes I've needed to make.
The most "controversial" here is implementing `trait_candidate_should_be_dropped_in_favor_of`, which I just implemented to always return false. This surprisingly allows some code to compile, without us having to actually decide on any semantics yet.
r? `@rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor`
correctly update goals in the cache
we may want to actually write the response for our goal into the provisional or global cache instead of simply using the result from the last iteration '^^
r? ```@rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor```
Now that the compiler accepts "-Z instrument-xray" option only when
targeting one of the supported targets, make sure to not run the
codegen tests where the compiler will fail.
Like with other compiletests, we don't have access to internals,
so simply hardcode a list of supported architectures here.
This is somewhat important because LLVM enables the pass based on
target architecture, but support by the target OS also matters.
For example, XRay attributes are processed by codegen for macOS
targets, but Apple linker fails to process relocations in XRay
data sections, so the feature as a whole is not supported there
for the time being.
Let's add at least some tests to verify that this option is accepted
and produces expected LLVM attributes. More tests can be added later
with attribute support.
Recognize all bells and whistles that LLVM's XRay pass is capable of.
The always/never settings are a bit dumb without attributes but they're
still there. The default instruction count is chosen by the compiler,
not LLVM pass. We'll do it later.
