Change several HashMaps to IndexMap to improve incremental hashing performance
Stable hashing hash maps in incremental mode takes a lot of time, especially for some benchmarks like `clap`. As noted by `@Mark-Simulacrum` [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/89404#issuecomment-950043892), this cost could be reduced by replacing some hash maps by indexmaps.
I gathered some statistics and found several hash maps that took a lot of time to hash and replaced them by indexmaps. However, in order for this to work, we need to make sure that these indexmaps have deterministic insertion order. These three are used only in visitors as far as I can see, which seems deterministic. Can we enforce this somehow? Or should some explaining comment be included for these maps?
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #93283 (Fix for localized windows editions in testcase fn read_link() Issue#93211)
- #94592 (Fallback to top-level config.toml if not present in current directory, and remove fallback for env vars and CLI flags)
- #94776 (Optimize ascii::escape_default)
- #94840 (update `replace_bound_vars_with_placeholders` doc comment)
- #94842 (Remove unnecessary try_opt for operations that cannot fail)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Remove unnecessary try_opt for operations that cannot fail
As indicated in the added comments, some operation cannot overflow, so using `try_opt!` for them is unnecessary.
Optimize ascii::escape_default
`ascii::escape_default` showed up as a hot function when compiling `deunicode-1.3.1` in `@nnethercote's` [analysis](https://hackmd.io/mxdn4U58Su-UQXwzOHpHag) of `@lqd's` [rustc-benchmarking-data](https://github.com/lqd/rustc-benchmarking-data).
After taking a look at the generated assembly it looked like a LUT-based approach could be faster for `hexify()`-ing ascii characters, so that's what this PR implements
The patch looks like it provides about a 1-2% improvement in instructions for that particular crate. This should definitely be verified with a perf run as I'm still getting used to the `rustc-perf` tooling and might easily have made an error!
Fallback to top-level config.toml if not present in current directory, and remove fallback for env vars and CLI flags
This preserves the behavior where x.py will only give a hard error on a missing config file if it was configured through `--config` or RUST_BOOTSTRAP_CONFIG. It also removes the top-level fallback for everything except the default path; presumably if you're passing the path explicitly, you expect it to be exactly there and don't want to look in the root directory.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/94589.
Fix for localized windows editions in testcase fn read_link() Issue#93211
This PR aims to fix the issue with localized windows versions that do not necessarily have the folder "Documents and settings" in English.
The idea was provided by `@the8472.` We check if the "CI" environment variable is set, then we always check for the "Documents and Settings"-folder, otherwise we check if the folder exists on the local machine, and if not we skip this assert.
Resoles #93211.
Improve doc wording for retain on some collections
I found the documentation wording on the various retain methods on many collections to be unusual.
I tried to invert the relation by switching `such that` with `for which` .
Rename is_{some,ok,err}_with to is_{some,ok,err}_and.
This renames `is_{some,ok,err}_with` to `is_{some,ok,err}_and`. This was discussed on the [tracking issue](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/93050).
mir-opt: Replace clone on primitives with copy
We can't do it for everything, but it would be nice to at least stop making calls to clone methods in debug from things like derived-clones.
r? `@ghost`
Only emit pointer-like metadata for `Box<T, A>` when `A` is ZST
Basically copy the change in #94043, but for debuginfo.
r? ``@michaelwoerister``
Fixes#94725
Statically compile libstdc++ everywhere if asked
PR #93918 made it so that `-static-libstdc++` was only set in one place,
and was only set during linking, but accidentally also made it so that
it is no longer passed when building LLD, only when building LLVM
itself. This moves the logic for setting `-static-libstdc++` in the
linker flags to `configure_cmake` so that it takes effect for all CMake
invocations in `native.rs`.
As a side-effect, this also causes libstdc++ to be statically compiled
into sanitizers, whereas previously the `llvm-static-stdcpp` flag had no
effect on sanitizers. It also makes it so that LLD will be compiled
statically if `llvm-tools-enabled` is set, even though previously it was
only linked statically if `llvm-static-stdcpp` was set explicitly. Both
of these seem like they match expected behavior than what was there
prior to #93918.
[1/2] Implement macro meta-variable expressions
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/93545#issuecomment-1050963295
The logic behind `length`, `index` and `count` was removed but the parsing code is still present, i.e., everything is simply ignored like `ignored`.
r? ``@petrochenkov``
Treat unstable lints as unknown
This change causes unstable lints to be ignored if the `unknown_lints`
lint is allowed. To achieve this, it also changes lints to apply as soon
as they are processed. Previously, lints in the same set were processed
as a batch and then all simultaneously applied.
Implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/469
Use modern formatting for format! macros
This updates the standard library's documentation to use the new format_args syntax.
The documentation is worthwhile to update as it should be more idiomatic
(particularly for features like this, which are nice for users to get acquainted
with). The general codebase is likely more hassle than benefit to update: it'll
hurt git blame, and generally updates can be done by folks updating the code if
(and when) that makes things more readable with the new format.
A few places in the compiler and library code are updated (mostly just due to
already having been done when this commit was first authored).
`eprintln!("{}", e)` becomes `eprintln!("{e}")`, but `eprintln!("{}", e.kind())` remains untouched.
RustWrapper: add missing include
This is required after LLVM change 3c4410dfcaaf (aka
https://reviews.llvm.org/D121168) did some includes cleanup.
r? nikic
Allow `cargo run` instead of `cargo run -p bootstrap`
This was part of `@Mark-Simulacrum` 's original PR in ecb424f129,
but I missed it when writing #92260.
This also has the side effect of allowing `cargo build --bins` instead of `cargo build -p bootstrap --bins`. I'm not sure when you would want to run cargo build/check/test without going through bootstrap, but this still allows you to do so as long as you pass `-p` for all the crates you want to build.
Improve rustdoc book
This pull-request improves the `rustdoc` book by doing some (light) cleanup, by merging some stuff, by adding some missing stuff (like tracking issues links, for those who had one) and also by moving some chapter's into sub-chapter's to improve the flow of the book.
~~Note that I locally tested with `mdbook-lintcheck` that no links became accidentally broken.~~ (Not enough, ;-))
r? `````@GuillaumeGomez`````
Unify impl blocks by wrapping them into a div
The blanket and "auto traits" sections are wrapped into a `div` with an ID. This PR fixes this incoherence by wrapping each impl section (the "deref impl" and the "inherent impl" sections were missing it). It'll also make some tests simpler to write.
r? `````@notriddle`````
Document new recommended use of `FromIterator::from_iter`
#90107
Most of the added prose was paraphrased from the links provided in the issue. The suggested `VecDeque` example seemed to make the point well enough so I just used that.
Better error for normalization errors from parent crates that use `#![feature(generic_const_exprs)]`
This PR implements a somewhat rudimentary heuristic to suggest using `#![feature(generic_const_exprs)]` in a child crate when a function from a foreign crate (that may have used `#![feature(generic_const_exprs)]`) fails to normalize during codegen.
cc: #79018
cc: #94287
This updates the standard library's documentation to use the new syntax. The
documentation is worthwhile to update as it should be more idiomatic
(particularly for features like this, which are nice for users to get acquainted
with). The general codebase is likely more hassle than benefit to update: it'll
hurt git blame, and generally updates can be done by folks updating the code if
(and when) that makes things more readable with the new format.
A few places in the compiler and library code are updated (mostly just due to
already having been done when this commit was first authored).
diagnostics: use rustc_on_unimplemented to recommend `[].iter()`
To make this work, the `#[rustc_on_unimplemented]` data needs to be used to
report method resolution errors, which is most of what this commit does.
Fixes#94581
Constify `Index{,Mut}` for `[T]`, `str`, and `[T; N]`
Several panic functions were rewired (via `const_eval_select`) to simpler implementations that do not require formatting for compile-time usage.
r? ```@oli-obk```
Merge `#[deprecated]` and `#[rustc_deprecated]`
The first commit makes "reason" an alias for "note" in `#[rustc_deprecated]`, while still prohibiting it in `#[deprecated]`.
The second commit changes "suggestion" to not just be a feature of `#[rustc_deprecated]`. This is placed behind the new `deprecated_suggestion` feature. This needs a tracking issue; let me know if this PR will be approved and I can create one.
The third commit is what permits `#[deprecated]` to be used when `#![feature(staged_api)]` is enabled. This isn't yet used in stdlib (only tests), as it would require duplicating all deprecation attributes until a bootstrap occurs. I intend to submit a follow-up PR that replaces all uses and removes the remaining `#[rustc_deprecated]` code after the next bootstrap.
`@rustbot` label +T-libs-api +C-feature-request +A-attributes +S-waiting-on-review
Improve suggestion when casting usize to (possibly) wide pointer
I thought #92125 was a wonderful idea, so I went ahead and took a stab at it. Not sure if my approach is the best going forward, but I'm happy with the improvement in the error message.
Iwill definitely address any changes if people are more opinionated with the wordings or want more features.
Also, do I need to add a new error code?
(Fixes#92125)
