The demangler was only needed by coverage tests, but those tests were migrated
into their own custom test mode in #112300.
This avoids having to build the demangler just for run-make tests. It will
still be built as needed by run-coverage tests or for other purposes.
Refactor some `char`, `u8` ASCII functions to be branchless
Extract conditions in singular `matches!` with or-patterns to individual `matches!` statements which enables branchless code output. The following functions were changed:
- `is_ascii_alphanumeric`
- `is_ascii_hexdigit`
- `is_ascii_punctuation`
Added codegen tests
---
Continued from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103024.
Based on the comment from `@scottmcm` https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/103024#pullrequestreview-1248697206.
The unmodified `is_ascii_*` functions didn't seem to benefit from extracting the conditions.
I've never written a codegen test before, but I tried to check that no branches were emitted.
ZeroSized constants can be represented as `mir::Const::Val` even if
their layout is not yet known. In those cases, CrateItem::body() was
crashing when trying to convert a `ConstValue::ZeroSized` into its
stable counterpart `ConstantKind::Allocated`.
Instead, we now map `ConstValue::ZeroSized` into a new variant:
`ConstantKind::ZeroSized`.
Allow target specs to use an LLD flavor, and self-contained linking components
This PR allows:
- target specs to use an LLD linker-flavor: this is needed to switch `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` to using LLD, and is currently not possible because the current flavor json serialization fails to roundtrip on the modern linker-flavors. This can e.g. be seen in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115622#discussion_r1321312880 which explains where an `Lld::Yes` is ultimately deserialized into an `Lld::No`.
- target specs to declare self-contained linking components: this is needed to switch `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` to using `rust-lld`
- adds an end-to-end test of a custom target json simulating `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` being switched to using `rust-lld`
- disables codegen backends from participating because they don't support `-Zgcc-ld=lld` which is the basis of mcp510.
r? `@petrochenkov:` if the approach discussed https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115622#discussion_r1329403467 and on zulip would work for you: basically, see if we can emit only modern linker flavors in the json specs, but accept both old and new flavors while reading them, to fix the roundtrip issue.
The backwards compatible `LinkSelfContainedDefault` variants are still serialized and deserialized in `crt-objects-fallback`, while the spec equivalent of e.g. `-Clink-self-contained=+linker` is serialized into a different json object (with future-proofing to incorporate `crt-objects-fallback` in the future).
---
I've been test-driving this in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/113382 to test actually switching `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` to `rust-lld` (and fix what needs to be fixed in CI, bootstrap, etc), and it seems to work fine.
Decompose singular `matches!` with or-patterns to individual `matches!`
statements to enable branchless code output. The following functions
were changed:
- `is_ascii_alphanumeric`
- `is_ascii_hexdigit`
- `is_ascii_punctuation`
Add codegen tests
Co-authored-by: George Bateman <george.bateman16@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: scottmcm <scottmcm@users.noreply.github.com>
Explain implementation of mem::replace
This adds a comment to explain why `mem::replace` is not implemented in terms of `mem::swap` to prevent [naïfs like me](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117189) from trying to "fix" it.
When expecting closure argument but finding block provide suggestion
Detect if there is a potential typo where the `{` meant to open the closure body was written before the body.
```
error[E0277]: expected a `FnOnce<({integer},)>` closure, found `Option<usize>`
--> $DIR/ruby_style_closure_successful_parse.rs:3:31
|
LL | let p = Some(45).and_then({|x|
| ______________________--------_^
| | |
| | required by a bound introduced by this call
LL | | 1 + 1;
LL | | Some(x * 2)
| | ----------- this tail expression is of type `Option<usize>`
LL | | });
| |_____^ expected an `FnOnce<({integer},)>` closure, found `Option<usize>`
|
= help: the trait `FnOnce<({integer},)>` is not implemented for `Option<usize>`
note: required by a bound in `Option::<T>::and_then`
--> $SRC_DIR/core/src/option.rs:LL:COL
help: you might have meant to open the closure body instead of placing a closure within a block
|
LL - let p = Some(45).and_then({|x|
LL + let p = Some(45).and_then(|x| {
|
```
Detect the potential typo where the closure header is missing.
```
error[E0277]: expected a `FnOnce<(&bool,)>` closure, found `bool`
--> $DIR/block_instead_of_closure_in_arg.rs:3:23
|
LL | Some(true).filter({
| _________________------_^
| | |
| | required by a bound introduced by this call
LL | |/ if number % 2 == 0 {
LL | || number == 0
LL | || } else {
LL | || number != 0
LL | || }
| ||_________- this tail expression is of type `bool`
LL | | });
| |______^ expected an `FnOnce<(&bool,)>` closure, found `bool`
|
= help: the trait `for<'a> FnOnce<(&'a bool,)>` is not implemented for `bool`
note: required by a bound in `Option::<T>::filter`
--> $SRC_DIR/core/src/option.rs:LL:COL
help: you might have meant to create the closure instead of a block
|
LL | Some(true).filter(|_| {
| +++
```
Partially address #27300. Fix#104690.
Centralize command running in boostrap (part one)
This PR tries to consolidate the various `run, try_run, run_quiet, run_quiet_delaying_failure, run_delaying_failure` etc. methods on `Builder`. This PR only touches command execution which doesn't produce output that would be later read by bootstrap, and it also only refactors spawning of commands that happens after a builder is created (commands executed during download & git submodule checkout are left as-is, for now).
The `run_cmd` method is quite meaty, but I expect that it will be changing rapidly soon, so I considered it easy to kept everything in a single method, and only after things settle down a bit, then maybe again split it up a bit.
I still kept the original shortcut methods like `run_quiet_delaying_failure`, but they now only delegate to `run_cmd`. I tried to keep the original behavior (or as close to it as possible) for all the various commands, but it is a giant mess, so there may be some deviations. Notably, `cmd.output()` is now always called, instead of just `status()`, which was called previously in some situations.
Apart from the refactored methods, there is also `Config::try_run`, `check_run`, methods that run commands that produce output, oh my… that's left for follow-up PRs :)
The driving goal of this (and following) refactors is to centralize command execution in bootstrap on a single place, to make command mocking feasible.
r? `@onur-ozkan`
When encountering an associated item with a type param that could be
constrained, do not look at the parent item if the type param comes from
the associated item.
Fix#117209.
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #116905 (refactor(compiler/resolve): simplify some code)
- #117095 (Add way to differentiate argument locals from other locals in Stable MIR)
- #117143 (Avoid unbounded O(n^2) when parsing nested type args)
- #117194 (Minor improvements to `rustc_incremental`)
- #117202 (Revert "Remove TaKO8Ki from reviewers")
- #117207 (The value of `-Cinstrument-coverage=` doesn't need to be `Option`)
- #117214 (Quietly fail if an error has already occurred)
- #117221 (Rename type flag `HAS_TY_GENERATOR` to `HAS_TY_COROUTINE`)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
The value of `-Cinstrument-coverage=` doesn't need to be `Option`
(Extracted from #117199, since this is a purely internal cleanup that can land independently.)
Not using this flag is identical to passing `-Cinstrument-coverage=off`, so there's no need to distinguish between `None` and `Some(Off)`.
Revert "Remove TaKO8Ki from reviewers"
ref #116061
It's been a month since this pull request, and I now have some available time for reviews. Would it be okay to revisit it as a reviewer?
This reverts commit 8e06b25e39.
r? `@Nilstrieb`
Add way to differentiate argument locals from other locals in Stable MIR
This PR resolvesrust-lang/project-stable-mir#47 which request a way to differentiate argument locals in a SMIR `Body` from other locals.
Specifically, this PR exposes the `arg_count` field from the MIR `Body`. However, I'm opening this as a draft PR because I think there are a few outstanding questions on how this information should be exposed and described. Namely:
- Is exposing `arg_count` the best way to surface this information to SMIR users? Would it be better to leave `arg_count` as a private field and add public methods (e.g. `fn arguments(&self) -> Iter<'_, LocalDecls>`) that may use the underlying `arg_count` info from the MIR body, but expose this information to users in a more convenient form? Or is it best to stick close to the current MIR convention?
- If the answer to the above point is to stick with the current MIR convention (`arg_count`), is it reasonable to also commit to sticking to the current MIR convention that the first local is always the return local, while the next `arg_count` locals are always the (in-order) argument locals?
- Should `Body` in SMIR only represent function bodies (as implied by the comment I added)? That seems to be the current case in MIR, but should this restriction always be the case for SMIR?
r? `@celinval`
r? `@oli-obk`
