Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #93899 (Describe VecDeque with more consistent names)
- #93949 (Add basic platform support to library/{panic_}unwind for m68k)
- #93999 (suggest using raw strings when invalid escapes appear in literals)
- #94001 (llvm: migrate to new parameter-bearing uwtable attr)
- #94014 (Move transmute_undefined_repr back to nursery)
Failed merges:
- #94020 (Support pretty printing of invalid constants)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Move transmute_undefined_repr back to nursery
There's still open discussion if this lint is ready to be enabled by
default. We want to give us more time to figure this out and prevent
this lint from getting to stable as an enabled-by-default lint.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/8432
r? `@Manishearth` `@dtolnay`
I think this is the way to go here. We can re-enable this lint with the next sync, if we should decide to do so. But I would hold of for this release.
We have until Friday (beta branching) to decide if we want to merge this.
llvm: migrate to new parameter-bearing uwtable attr
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D114543 the uwtable attribute gained a flag
so that we can ask for sync uwtables instead of async, as the former are
much cheaper. The default is async, so that's what I've done here, but I
left a TODO that we might be able to do better.
While in here I went ahead and dropped support for removing uwtable
attributes in rustc: we never did it, so I didn't write the extra C++
bridge code to make it work. Maybe I should have done the same thing
with the `sync|async` parameter but we'll see.
suggest using raw strings when invalid escapes appear in literals
i'd guess about 70% of "bad escape" cases occur when someone meant to use a raw string literal because they're passing it directly to `Regex::new()`.
this emits an advisory (`Applicability::MaybeIncorrect`) `help:` suggestion to the user that they use an `r""` string, on top of the normal notes about looking at the string literal documentation/spec.
Add basic platform support to library/{panic_}unwind for m68k
This PR adds basic platform support for m68k for library/{panic_}unwind for m68k.
Register information for UNWIND_DATA_REG has been extracted from LLVM.
Describe VecDeque with more consistent names
The public documentation of VecDeque starts describing itself as a "queue". In method descriptions, it's ~~never~~ sometimes named queue again, or `VecDeque` (IMO a sometimes useful and often noisy notation) or "deque" or "vector". In examples, `deque`, `v` (hidden in `range_mut`) or `vector`. Here is a subjective attempt at more consistency.
RustHermit and HermitCore is able to run on aarch64 and x86_64.
In the future these operating systems will also support RISC-V.
Consequently, the dependency to a specific target should be removed.
Building hermit-abi fails if the architecture isn't supported.
Overhaul interning.
A number of types are interned and `eq` and `hash` are implemented on
the pointer rather than the contents. But this is not well enforced
within the type system like you might expect.
This PR introduces a new type `Interned` which encapsulates this concept
more rigorously, and uses it to convert a couple of the less common
interned types.
r? `@fee1-dead`
There's still open discussion if this lint is ready to be enabled by
default. We want to give us more time to figure this out and prevent
this lint from getting to stable as an enabled-by-default lint.
Add a stack-`pin!`-ning macro to `core::pin`.
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93178
`pin!` allows pinning a value to the stack. Thanks to being implemented in the stdlib, which gives access to `macro` macros, and to the private `.pointer` field of the `Pin` wrapper, [it was recently discovered](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/187312-wg-async-foundations/topic/pin!.20.E2.80.94.20the.20.22definitive.22.20edition.20.28a.20rhs-compatible.20pin-nin.2E.2E.2E/near/268731241) ([archive link](https://zulip-archive.rust-lang.org/stream/187312-wg-async-foundations/topic/A.20rhs-compatible.20pin-ning.20macro.html#268731241)), contrary to popular belief, that it is actually possible to implement and feature such a macro:
```rust
let foo: Pin<&mut PhantomPinned> = pin!(PhantomPinned);
stuff(foo);
```
or, directly:
```rust
stuff(pin!(PhantomPinned));
```
- For context, historically, this used to require one of the two following syntaxes:
- ```rust
let foo = PhantomPinned;
pin!(foo);
stuff(foo);
```
- ```rust
pin! {
let foo = PhantomPinned;
}
stuff(foo);
```
This macro thus allows, for instance, doing things like:
```diff
fn block_on<T>(fut: impl Future<Output = T>) -> T {
// Pin the future so it can be polled.
- let mut fut = Box::pin(fut);
+ let mut fut = pin!(fut);
// Create a new context to be passed to the future.
let t = thread::current();
let waker = Arc::new(ThreadWaker(t)).into();
let mut cx = Context::from_waker(&waker);
// Run the future to completion.
loop {
match fut.as_mut().poll(&mut cx) {
Poll::Ready(res) => return res,
Poll::Pending => thread::park(),
}
}
}
```
- _c.f._, https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.58.1/alloc/task/trait.Wake.html
And so on, and so forth.
I don't think such an API can get better than that, barring full featured language support (`&pin` references or something), so I see no reason not to start experimenting with featuring this in the stdlib already 🙂
- cc `@rust-lang/wg-async-foundations` \[EDIT: this doesn't seem to have pinged anybody 😩, thanks `@yoshuawuyts` for the real ping\]
r? `@joshtriplett`
___
# Docs preview
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9920355/150605731-1f45c2eb-c9b0-4ce3-b17f-2784fb75786e.mp4
___
# Implementation
The implementation ends up being dead simple (so much it's embarrassing):
```rust
pub macro pin($value:expr $(,)?) {
Pin { pointer: &mut { $value } }
}
```
_and voilà_!
- The key for it working lies in [the rules governing the scope of anonymous temporaries](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.58.1/reference/destructors.html#temporary-lifetime-extension).
<details><summary>Comments and context</summary>
This is `Pin::new_unchecked(&mut { $value })`, so, for starters, let's
review such a hypothetical macro (that any user-code could define):
```rust
macro_rules! pin {( $value:expr ) => (
match &mut { $value } { at_value => unsafe { // Do not wrap `$value` in an `unsafe` block.
$crate::pin::Pin::<&mut _>::new_unchecked(at_value)
}}
)}
```
Safety:
- `type P = &mut _`. There are thus no pathological `Deref{,Mut}` impls that would break `Pin`'s invariants.
- `{ $value }` is braced, making it a _block expression_, thus **moving** the given `$value`, and making it _become an **anonymous** temporary_.
By virtue of being anonynomous, it can no longer be accessed, thus preventing any attemps to `mem::replace` it or `mem::forget` it, _etc._
This gives us a `pin!` definition that is sound, and which works, but only in certain scenarios:
- If the `pin!(value)` expression is _directly_ fed to a function call:
`let poll = pin!(fut).poll(cx);`
- If the `pin!(value)` expression is part of a scrutinee:
```rust
match pin!(fut) { pinned_fut => {
pinned_fut.as_mut().poll(...);
pinned_fut.as_mut().poll(...);
}} // <- `fut` is dropped here.
```
Alas, it doesn't work for the more straight-forward use-case: `let` bindings.
```rust
let pinned_fut = pin!(fut); // <- temporary value is freed at the end of this statement
pinned_fut.poll(...) // error[E0716]: temporary value dropped while borrowed
// note: consider using a `let` binding to create a longer lived value
```
- Issues such as this one are the ones motivating https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/66
This makes such a macro incredibly unergonomic in practice, and the reason most macros out there had to take the path of being a statement/binding macro (_e.g._, `pin!(future);`) instead of featuring the more intuitive ergonomics of an expression macro.
Luckily, there is a way to avoid the problem. Indeed, the problem stems from the fact that a temporary is dropped at the end of its enclosing statement when it is part of the parameters given to function call, which has precisely been the case with our `Pin::new_unchecked()`!
For instance,
```rust
let p = Pin::new_unchecked(&mut <temporary>);
```
becomes:
```rust
let p = { let mut anon = <temporary>; &mut anon };
```
However, when using a literal braced struct to construct the value, references to temporaries can then be taken. This makes Rust change the lifespan of such temporaries so that they are, instead, dropped _at the end of the enscoping block_.
For instance,
```rust
let p = Pin { pointer: &mut <temporary> };
```
becomes:
```rust
let mut anon = <temporary>;
let p = Pin { pointer: &mut anon };
```
which is *exactly* what we want.
Finally, we don't hit problems _w.r.t._ the privacy of the `pointer` field, or the unqualified `Pin` name, thanks to `decl_macro`s being _fully_ hygienic (`def_site` hygiene).
</details>
___
# TODO
- [x] Add compile-fail tests with attempts to break the `Pin` invariants thanks to the macro (_e.g._, try to access the private `.pointer` field, or see what happens if such a pin is used outside its enscoping scope (borrow error));
- [ ] Follow-up stuff:
- [ ] Try to experiment with adding `pin!` to the prelude: this may require to be handled with some extra care, as it may lead to issues reminiscent of those of `assert_matches!`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82913
- [x] Create the tracking issue.
bootstrap: tidy up flag handling for llvm build
This tidies up the logic in `src/bootstrap/native.rs` such that:
- `CMAKE_*_LINKER_FLAGS` is not overridden if we add to it twice.
- `CMAKE_*_FLAGS` also include the standard `*FLAGS` environment
variables, which CMake respects when we _don't_ set `CMAKE_*_FLAGS`.
- `llvm.ldflags` from `config.toml` appends to the ldflags Rust's
bootstrap logic adds, rather than replacing them.
It also takes a second stab at #89983 by moving `-static-libstdc++` to just be passed as a linker flag, since that's what it is.
Fixes#93880. Fixes#70468. Closes#89983.
Specifically, rename the `Const` struct as `ConstS` and re-introduce `Const` as
this:
```
pub struct Const<'tcx>(&'tcx Interned<ConstS>);
```
This now matches `Ty` and `Predicate` more closely, including using
pointer-based `eq` and `hash`.
Notable changes:
- `mk_const` now takes a `ConstS`.
- `Const` was copy, despite being 48 bytes. Now `ConstS` is not, so need a
we need separate arena for it, because we can't use the `Dropless` one any
more.
- Many `&'tcx Const<'tcx>`/`&Const<'tcx>` to `Const<'tcx>` changes
- Many `ct.ty` to `ct.ty()` and `ct.val` to `ct.val()` changes.
- Lots of tedious sigil fiddling.
The variant names are exported, so we can use them directly (possibly
with a `ty::` qualifier). Lots of places already do this, this commit
just increases consistency.
Specifically, change `Region` from this:
```
pub type Region<'tcx> = &'tcx RegionKind;
```
to this:
```
pub struct Region<'tcx>(&'tcx Interned<RegionKind>);
```
This now matches `Ty` and `Predicate` more closely.
Things to note
- Regions have always been interned, but we haven't been using pointer-based
`Eq` and `Hash`. This is now happening.
- I chose to impl `Deref` for `Region` because it makes pattern matching a lot
nicer, and `Region` can be viewed as just a smart wrapper for `RegionKind`.
- Various methods are moved from `RegionKind` to `Region`.
- There is a lot of tedious sigil changes.
- A couple of types like `HighlightBuilder`, `RegionHighlightMode` now have a
`'tcx` lifetime because they hold a `Ty<'tcx>`, so they can call `mk_region`.
- A couple of test outputs change slightly, I'm not sure why, but the new
outputs are a little better.
Specifically, change `Ty` from this:
```
pub struct Predicate<'tcx> { inner: &'tcx PredicateInner<'tcx> }
```
to this:
```
pub struct Predicate<'tcx>(&'tcx Interned<PredicateS<'tcx>>)
```
where `PredicateInner` is renamed as `PredicateS`.
This (plus a few other minor changes) makes the parallels with `Ty` and
`TyS` much clearer, and makes the uniqueness more explicit.
Specifically, change `Ty` from this:
```
pub type Ty<'tcx> = &'tcx TyS<'tcx>;
```
to this
```
pub struct Ty<'tcx>(Interned<'tcx, TyS<'tcx>>);
```
There are two benefits to this.
- It's now a first class type, so we can define methods on it. This
means we can move a lot of methods away from `TyS`, leaving `TyS` as a
barely-used type, which is appropriate given that it's not meant to
be used directly.
- The uniqueness requirement is now explicit, via the `Interned` type.
E.g. the pointer-based `Eq` and `Hash` comes from `Interned`, rather
than via `TyS`, which wasn't obvious at all.
Much of this commit is boring churn. The interesting changes are in
these files:
- compiler/rustc_middle/src/arena.rs
- compiler/rustc_middle/src/mir/visit.rs
- compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/context.rs
- compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/mod.rs
Specifically:
- Most mentions of `TyS` are removed. It's very much a dumb struct now;
`Ty` has all the smarts.
- `TyS` now has `crate` visibility instead of `pub`.
- `TyS::make_for_test` is removed in favour of the static `BOOL_TY`,
which just works better with the new structure.
- The `Eq`/`Ord`/`Hash` impls are removed from `TyS`. `Interned`s impls
of `Eq`/`Hash` now suffice. `Ord` is now partly on `Interned`
(pointer-based, for the `Equal` case) and partly on `TyS`
(contents-based, for the other cases).
- There are many tedious sigil adjustments, i.e. adding or removing `*`
or `&`. They seem to be unavoidable.
In particular, there's now more protection against incorrect usage,
because you can only create one via `Interned::new_unchecked`, which
makes it more obvious that you must be careful.
There are also some tests.
Generator drop tracking: improve break and continue handling
This PR fixes two related issues.
One, sometimes break or continue have a block target instead of an expression target. This seems to mainly happen with try blocks. Since the drop tracking analysis only works on expressions, if we see a block target for break or continue, we substitute the last expression of the block as the target instead.
Two, break and continue were incorrectly being treated as the same, so continue would also show up as an exit from the loop or block. This patch corrects the way continue is handled by keeping a stack of loop entry points and uses those to find the target of the continue.
Fixes#93197
r? `@nikomatsakis`
In https://reviews.llvm.org/D114543 the uwtable attribute gained a flag
so that we can ask for sync uwtables instead of async, as the former are
much cheaper. The default is async, so that's what I've done here, but I
left a TODO that we might be able to do better.
While in here I went ahead and dropped support for removing uwtable
attributes in rustc: we never did it, so I didn't write the extra C++
bridge code to make it work. Maybe I should have done the same thing
with the `sync|async` parameter but we'll see.
i'd guess about 70% of "bad escape" cases occur when someone meant to
use a raw string literal because they're passing it directly to
Regex::new(). this emits an advisory (Applicability::MaybeIncorrect)
help: suggestion to the user that they use an r"" string,
on top of the normal notes about looking at the
string literal documentation/spec.
This change adds a flag for configuring control-flow protection in the
LLVM backend. In Clang, this flag is exposed as `-fcf-protection` with
options `none|branch|return|full`. This convention is followed for
`rustc`, though as a codegen option: `rustc -Z
cf-protection=<none|branch|return|full>`.
Co-authored-by: BlackHoleFox <blackholefoxdev@gmail.com>
This thus still makes it technically possible to enable the feature, and thus
to trigger UB without `unsafe`, but this is fine since incomplete features are
known to be potentially unsound (labelled "may not be safe").
This follows from the discussion at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93176#discussion_r799413561
Since `decl_macro`s and/or `Span::def_site()` is deemed quite unstable,
no public-facing macro that relies on it can hope to be, itself, stabilized.
We circumvent the issue by no longer relying on field privacy for safety and,
instead, relying on an unstable feature-gate to act as the gate keeper for
non users of the macro (thanks to `allow_internal_unstable`).
This is technically not correct (since a `nightly` user could technically enable
the feature and cause unsoundness with it); or, in other words, this makes the
feature-gate used to gate the access to the field be (technically unsound, and
in practice) `unsafe`. Hence it having `unsafe` in its name.
Back to the macro, we go back to `macro_rules!` / `mixed_site()`-span rules thanks
to declaring the `decl_macro` as `semitransparent`, which is a hack to basically have
`pub macro_rules!`
Co-Authored-By: Mara Bos <m-ou.se@m-ou.se>
