tweak "make mut" spans when assigning to locals
Work towards fixing #106857
This PR just cleans up a lot of spans which is helpful before properly fixing the issues. Best reviewed commit-by-commit.
r? `@estebank`
Tweak borrow suggestion span
Avoids a `span_to_snippet` call when we don't need to surround the expression in parentheses. The fact that the suggestion was using the whole span of the expression rather than just appending a `&` was prevented me from using `// run-rustfix` in another PR (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/110432#discussion_r1170500484).
Also some drive-by renames of functions that have been annoying me for a bit.
Fix some suggestions where a `Box<T>` is expected.
This fixes#111011, and also adds a suggestion for boxing a unit type when a `Box<T>` was expected and an empty block was found.
Implement tuple<->array convertions via `From`
This PR adds the following impls that convert between homogeneous tuples and arrays of the corresponding lengths:
```rust
impl<T> From<[T; 1]> for (T,) { ... }
impl<T> From<[T; 2]> for (T, T) { ... }
/* ... */
impl<T> From<[T; 12]> for (T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T) { ... }
impl<T> From<(T,)> for [T; 1] { ... }
impl<T> From<(T, T)> for [T; 2] { ... }
/* ... */
impl<T> From<(T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T, T)> for [T; 12] { ... }
```
IMO these are quite uncontroversial but note that they are, just like any other trait impls, insta-stable.
My type ascription
Oh rip it out
Ah
If you think we live too much then
You can sacrifice diagnostics
Don't mix your garbage
Into my syntax
So many weird hacks keep diagnostics alive
Yet I don't even step outside
So many bad diagnostics keep tyasc alive
Yet tyasc doesn't even bother to survive!
Tweak await span to not contain dot
Fixes a discrepancy between method calls and await expressions where the latter are desugared to have a span that *contains* the dot (i.e. `.await`) but method call identifiers don't contain the dot. This leads to weird suggestions suggestions in borrowck -- see linked issue.
Fixes#110761
This mostly touches a bunch of tests to tighten their `await` span.
fix false negative for `unused_mut`
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/110849
We want to avoid double diagnostics for code like this, but only if an error actually occurs:
```rust
fn main() {
let mut x: (i32, i32);
x.0 = 1;
}
```
The first commit fixes the lint and the second one removes all the unused `mut`s it found.
Substitute missing trait items suggestion correctly
Properly substitute missing item suggestions, so that when they reference generics from their parent trait they actually have the right time for the impl.
Also, some other minor tweaks like using `/* Type */` to signify a GAT's type is actually missing, and fixing generic arg suggestions for GATs in general.
Support AIX-style archive type
Reading facility of AIX big archive has been supported by `object` since 0.30.0.
Writing facility of AIX big archive has already been supported by `ar_archive_writer`, but we need to bump the version to support the new archive type enum.
Added diagnostic for pin! macro in addition to Box::pin if Unpin isn't implemented
I made a PR earlier, but accidentally renamed a branch and that deleted the PR... sorry for the duplicate
Currently, if an operation on `Pin<T>` is performed that requires `T` to implement `Unpin`, the diagnostic suggestion is to use `Box::pin` ("note: consider using `Box::pin`").
This PR suggests pin! as well, as that's another valid way of pinning a value, and avoids a heap allocation. Appropriate diagnostic suggestions were included to highlight the difference in semantics (local pinning for pin! vs non-local for Box::pin).
Fixes#109964
Use span of placeholders in format_args!() expansion.
`format_args!("{}", x)` expands to something that contains `Argument::new_display(&x)`. That entire expression was generated with the span of `x`.
After this PR, `&x` uses the span of `x`, but the `new_display` call uses the span of the `{}` placeholder within the format string. If an implicitly captured argument was used like in `format_args!("{x}")`, both use the span of the `{x}` placeholder.
This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/109576, and also allows for more improvements to similar diagnostics in the future, since the usage of `x` can now be traced to the exact `{}` placeholder that required it to be `Display` (or `Debug` etc.)
Pass the right HIR back from `get_fn_decl`
Fixes#109232
Makes sure that the `fn_id: HirId` that we pass to `suggest_missing_return_type` matches up with the `fn_decl: hir::FnDecl` that we pass to it, so the late-bound vars that we fetch from the former match up with the types in the latter...
This HIR suggestion code really needs a big refactor. I've tried to do it in the past (a couple of attempts), but it's a super tangled mess. It really shouldn't be passing around things like `hir::Node` and just deal with `LocalDefId`s everywhere... Anyways, I'd rather fix this ICE, now.
Emit diagnostic when calling methods on the unit type in method chains
Fixes#104204.
What this PR does: If a method is not found somewhere in a call chain, we check if we called earlier a method with signature `(&mut T, ...) -> ()`. If this is the case then we emit a diagnostic message.
For example given input:
```
vec![1, 2, 3].into_iter().collect::<Vec<i32>>().sort_by_key(|i| i).sort();
```
the current output is:
```
error[E0599]: no method named `sort` found for unit type `()` in the current scope
--> hello.rs:3:72
|
3 | vec![1, 2, 3].into_iter().collect::<Vec<i32>>().sort_by_key(|i| i).sort();
| ^^^^ method not found in `()`
```
after this PR it will be:
```
error[E0599]: no method named `sort` found for unit type `()` in the current scope
--> ./hello.rs:3:72
|
3 | vec![1, 2, 3].into_iter().collect::<Vec<i32>>().sort_by_key(|i| i).sort();
| ^^^^ method not found in `()`
|
note: method `sort_by_key` modifies its receiver in-place, it is not meant to be used in method chains.
--> ./hello.rs:3:53
|
3 | vec![1, 2, 3].into_iter().collect::<Vec<i32>>().sort_by_key(|i| i).sort();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ this call modifies its receiver in-place
```
If no method is found when checking method call, we check if we called a method with signature (&mut T, ...) -> (). If this is the case then we emit a diagnostic message
Remove `identity_future` indirection
This was previously needed because the indirection used to hide some unexplained lifetime errors, which it turned out were related to the `min_choice` algorithm.
Removing the indirection also solves a couple of cycle errors, large moves and makes async blocks support the `#[track_caller]`annotation.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/104826.
This was previously needed because the indirection used to hide some unexplained lifetime errors, which it turned out were related to the `min_choice` algorithm.
Removing the indirection also solves a couple of cycle errors, large moves and makes async blocks support the `#[track_caller]` annotation.
Consider `tests/ui/const-generics/generic_const_exprs/issue-102768.stderr`,
the error message where it gives additional notes about where the associated
type is defined, and how the dead code lint doesn't have an article,
like in `tests/ui/lint/dead-code/issue-85255.stderr`. They don't have
articles, so it seems unnecessary to have one here.
Considering the following code
```rust
fn foo() -> u8 {
async fn async_fn() -> u8 { 22 }
async_fn()
}
fn main() {}
```
the error generated before this commit from the compiler is
```
➜ rust git:(macros/async_fn_suggestion) ✗ rustc test.rs --edition 2021
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> test.rs:4:5
|
1 | fn foo() -> u8 {
| -- expected `u8` because of return type
...
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `u8`, found opaque type
|
= note: expected type `u8`
found opaque type `impl Future<Output = u8>`
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
4 | async_fn().await
| ++++++
error: aborting due to previous error
```
In this case the error is nor perfect, and can confuse the user
that do not know that the opaque type is the future.
So this commit will propose (and conclude the work start in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80658)
to change the string `opaque type` to `future` when applicable
and also remove the Expected vs Received note by adding a more
specific one regarding the async function that return a future type.
So the new error emitted by the compiler is
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> test.rs:4:5
|
1 | fn foo() -> u8 {
| -- expected `u8` because of return type
...
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^ expected `u8`, found future
|
note: calling an async function returns a future
--> test.rs:4:5
|
4 | async_fn()
| ^^^^^^^^^^
help: consider `await`ing on the `Future`
|
4 | async_fn().await
| ++++++
error: aborting due to previous error
```
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
Fix problem noticed in PR106859 with char -> u8 suggestion
HN reader `@ayosec` noticed that my #106859 a few weeks back, malfunctions if you have a Unicode escape, the code suggested b'\u{0}' if you tried to use '\u{0}' where a byte should be, when of course b'\u{0}' is not a byte literal, regardless of the codepoint you can't write Unicode escapes in a byte literal at all.
My proposed fix here just checks that the "character" you wrote is fewer than 5 bytes, thus allowing \x7F and similar escapes but conveniently forbidding even the smallest Unicode escape \u{0} before offering the suggestion as before.
I have provided an updated test which includes examples which do and don't work because of this additional rule.
Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches
Maybe I'm just misinterpreting the wording of the note. The only value I can see in this note is that it points out where the async's opaque future is coming from, but the way it's doing it is misleading IMO.
For example:
```rust
note: while checking the return type of the `async fn`
--> $DIR/dont-suggest-missing-await.rs:7:24
|
LL | async fn make_u32() -> u32 {
| ^^^ checked the `Output` of this `async fn`, found opaque type
```
We point at the type `u32` in the HIR, but then say "found opaque type". We also say "while checking"... but we're typechecking a totally different function when we get this type mismatch!
r? ``@estebank`` but feel free to reassign and/or take your time reviewing this. I'd be inclined to also discuss reworking the presentation of this type mismatch to restore some of these labels in a way that makes it more clear what it's trying to point out.
Modify primary span label for E0308
Looking at the reactions to https://hachyderm.io/`@ekuber/109622160673605438,` a lot of people seem to have trouble understanding the current output, where the primary span label on type errors talks about the specific types that diverged, but these can be deeply nested type parameters. Because of that we could see "expected i32, found u32" in the label while the note said "expected Vec<i32>, found Vec<u32>". This understandably confuses people. I believe that once people learn to read these errors it starts to make more sense, but this PR changes the output to be more in line with what people might expect, without sacrificing terseness.
Fix#68220.
Fix invalid float literal suggestions when recovering an integer
Only suggest adding a zero to integers with a preceding dot when the change will result in a valid floating point literal.
For example, `.0x0` should not be turned into `0.0x0`.
r? nnethercote
Only suggest adding a zero to integers with a preceding dot when the change will
result in a valid floating point literal.
For example, `.0x0` should not be turned into `0.0x0`.
Correct suggestions for closure arguments that need a borrow
Fixes#107301 by dealing with binders correctly
Fixes another issue where we were suggesting adding just `&` when we expected `&mut _` in a closure arg
Migrate mir_build's borrow conflicts
This also changes the error message slightly, for two reasons:
- I'm not a fan of saying "value borrowed, by `x`, here"
- it simplifies the error implementation significantly.
Consolidate two almost duplicated fn info extraction routines
Moves `extract_callable_info` up to trait selection, because it was being (almost) duplicated fully there for similar diagnostic purposes. This also generalizes the diagnostics we can give slightly (see UI test).
Suggestion for type mismatch when we need a u8 but the programmer wrote a char literal
Today Rust just points out that we have a char and we need a u8, but if I wrote 'A' then I could fix this by just writing b'A' instead. This code should detect the case where we're about to report a type mismatch of this kind, and the programmer wrote a char literal, and the char they wrote is ASCII, so therefore just prefixing b to make a byte literal will do what they meant.
I have definitely written this mistake more than once, it's not difficult to figure out what to do, but the compiler might as well tell us anyway.
I provided a test with two simple examples where the suggestion is appropriate, and one where it is not because the char literal is not ASCII, showing that the suggestion is only triggered in the former cases.
I have contributed only a small typo doc fix before, so this is my first substantive rustc change.
Emit a hint for bad call return types due to generic arguments
When the return type of a function call depends on the type of an argument, e.g.
```
fn foo<T>(x: T) -> T {
x
}
```
and the expected type is set due to either an explicitly typed binding, or because the call to the function is in a tail position without semicolon, the current error implies that the argument in the call has the wrong type.
This new hint highlights that the expected type doesn't match the returned type, which matches the argument type, and that that's why we're flagging the argument type.
Fixes#43608.
When the return type of a function call depends on the type of an
argument, e.g.
```
fn foo<T>(x: T) -> T {
x
}
```
and the expected type is set due to either an explicitly typed
binding, or because the call to the function is in a tail position
without semicolon, the current error implies that the argument in the
call has the wrong type.
This new hint highlights that the expected type doesn't match the
returned type, which matches the argument type, and that that's why
we're flagging the argument type.
Fixes#43608.
Migrate mir_build diagnostics 2 of 3
The first three commits are fairly boring, however I've made some changes to the output of the match checking diagnostics.
Fix invalid syntax and incomplete suggestion in impl Trait parameter type suggestions for E0311
Fixes#105544
The problems: The suggestion given for E0311 has invalid syntax when the synthetic type parameter is used for Trait type in function declaration:
```rust
fn foo(d: impl Sized) -> impl Sized
```
instead of explicitly specified like the following:
```rust
fn foo<T: Sized>(d: T) -> impl Sized
```
In addition to the syntax error, the suggestions given for E0311 are not complete when multiple elided lifetimes are involved in lifetime bounds, not all involved parameters are given the named lifetime in the suggestions. For the following test case:
```
fn foo(d: impl Sized, p: &mut ()) -> impl Sized + '_ {
(d, p)
}
```
a good suggestion should add the lifetime 'a to both d and p, instead of d only:
```
fn foo<'a>(d: impl Sized + 'a, p: &'a mut ()) -> impl Sized + '_ {
(d, p)
}
```
The Solution: Fix the syntax problem in the suggestions when synthetic type parameter is used, and also add lifetimes for all involved parameters.
