Bug #52452 notes some debuginfo test regressions when moving to gdb
8.1. This series will also cause versions of gdb before 8.2 to fail
when a recent LLVM is used -- DW_TAG_variant_part support was not
added until 8.2.
This patch updates one of the builders to a later version of Ubuntu,
which comes with gdb 8.2. It updates the relevant tests to require
both a new-enough LLVM and a new-enough gdb; the subsequent patch
arranges to continue testing the fallback mode.
The "gdbg" results are removed from these tests because the tests now
require a rust-enabled gdb.
If you read closely, you'll see that some of the lldb results in this
patch still look a bit strange. This will be addressed in a
subsequent patch; I believe the fix is to disable the Python
pretty-printers when lldb is rust-enabled.
If the rust-enabled lldb was built, then use it when running the
debuginfo tests. Updating the lldb submodule was necessary as this
needed a way to differentiate the rust-enabled lldb, so I added a line
to the --version output.
This adds compiletest commands to differentiate between the
rust-enabled and non-rust-enabled lldb, as is already done for gdb. A
new "rust-lldb" header directive is also added, but not used in this
patch; I plan to use it in #54004.
This updates all the tests.
This is the kind of change that one is expected to need to make to
accommodate overloaded-`box`.
----
Note that this is not *all* of the changes necessary to accommodate
Issue 22181. It is merely the subset of those cases where there was
already a let-binding in place that made it easy to add the necesasry
type ascription.
(For unnamed intermediate `Box` values, one must go down a different
route; `Box::new` is the option that maximizes portability, but has
potential inefficiency depending on whether the call is inlined.)
----
There is one place worth note, `run-pass/coerce-match.rs`, where I
used an ugly form of `Box<_>` type ascription where I would have
preferred to use `Box::new` to accommodate overloaded-`box`. I
deliberately did not use `Box::new` here, because that is already done
in coerce-match-calls.rs.
----
Precursor for overloaded-`box` and placement-`in`; see Issue 22181.
This change makes the compiler no longer infer whether types (structures
and enumerations) implement the `Copy` trait (and thus are implicitly
copyable). Rather, you must implement `Copy` yourself via `impl Copy for
MyType {}`.
A new warning has been added, `missing_copy_implementations`, to warn
you if a non-generic public type has been added that could have
implemented `Copy` but didn't.
For convenience, you may *temporarily* opt out of this behavior by using
`#![feature(opt_out_copy)]`. Note though that this feature gate will never be
accepted and will be removed by the time that 1.0 is released, so you should
transition your code away from using it.
This breaks code like:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
Change this code to:
#[deriving(Show)]
struct Point2D {
x: int,
y: int,
}
impl Copy for Point2D {}
fn main() {
let mypoint = Point2D {
x: 1,
y: 1,
};
let otherpoint = mypoint;
println!("{}{}", mypoint, otherpoint);
}
This is the backwards-incompatible part of #13231.
Part of RFC #3.
[breaking-change]
