Refactor rustc_resolve::late::lifetimes to resolve per-item
There are some changes to tests that I'd like some feedback on; so this is still WIP.
The reason behind this change will (hopefully) allow us to (as part of #76814) be able to essentially use the lifetime resolve code to resolve *all* late bound vars (including those of super traits). Currently, it only resolves those that are *syntactically* in scope. In #76814, I'm essentially finding that I would essentially have to redo the passing of bound vars through scopes (i.e. when instantiating a poly trait ref), and that's what this code does anyways. However, to be able to do this (ask super traits what bound vars are in scope), we have to be able to resolve items separately.
The first commit is actually partially orthogonal. Essentially removing one use of late bound debruijn indices.
Not exactly sure who would be best to review here.
Let r? `@nikomatsakis`
GenericParam does not need to be a HIR owner.
The special case is not required.
Universal impl traits design to regular generic parameters, and their content is owned by the enclosing item.
Existential (and opaque) impl traits generate their own enclosing item, and are collected through it.
Which thus missed the point of the change: `rustdoc` already bundled documentation for methods accessible through one layer of `Deref`, it now has been enhanced to keep recursing 🙂
Proper Unix terminology is "exit status" (vs "wait status"). "exit
code" is imprecise on Unix and therefore unclear. (As far as I can
tell, "exit code" is correct terminology on Windows.)
This new wording is unfortunately inconsistent with the identifier
names in the Rust stdlib.
It is the identifier names that are wrong, as discussed at length in eg
https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/process/struct.ExitStatus.htmlhttps://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/std/os/unix/process/trait.ExitStatusExt.html
Unfortunately for API stability reasons it would be a lot of work, and
a lot of disruption, to change the names in the stdlib (eg to rename
`std::process::ExitStatus` to `std::process::ChildStatus` or
something), but we should fix the message output. Many (probably
most) readers of these messages about exit statuses will be users and
system administrators, not programmers, who won't even know that Rust
has this wrong terminology.
So I think the right thing is to fix the documentation (as I have
already done) and, now, the terminology in the implementation.
This is a user-visible change to the behaviour of all Rust programs
which run Unix subprocesses. Hopefully no-one is matching against the
exit status string, except perhaps in tests.
Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
coverage bug fixes and optimization support
Adjusted LLVM codegen for code compiled with `-Zinstrument-coverage` to
address multiple, somewhat related issues.
Fixed a significant flaw in prior coverage solution: Every counter
generated a new counter variable, but there should have only been one
counter variable per function. This appears to have bloated .profraw
files significantly. (For a small program, it increased the size by
about 40%. I have not tested large programs, but there is anecdotal
evidence that profraw files were way too large. This is a good fix,
regardless, but hopefully it also addresses related issues.
Fixes: #82144
Invalid LLVM coverage data produced when compiled with -C opt-level=1
Existing tests now work up to at least `opt-level=3`. This required a
detailed analysis of the LLVM IR, comparisons with Clang C++ LLVM IR
when compiled with coverage, and a lot of trial and error with codegen
adjustments.
The biggest hurdle was figuring out how to continue to support coverage
results for unused functions and generics. Rust's coverage results have
three advantages over Clang's coverage results:
1. Rust's coverage map does not include any overlapping code regions,
making coverage counting unambiguous.
2. Rust generates coverage results (showing zero counts) for all unused
functions, including generics. (Clang does not generate coverage for
uninstantiated template functions.)
3. Rust's unused functions produce minimal stubbed functions in LLVM IR,
sufficient for including in the coverage results; while Clang must
generate the complete LLVM IR for each unused function, even though
it will never be called.
This PR removes the previous hack of attempting to inject coverage into
some other existing function instance, and generates dedicated instances
for each unused function. This change, and a few other adjustments
(similar to what is required for `-C link-dead-code`, but with lower
impact), makes it possible to support LLVM optimizations.
Fixes: #79651
Coverage report: "Unexecuted instantiation:..." for a generic function
from multiple crates
Fixed by removing the aforementioned hack. Some "Unexecuted
instantiation" notices are unavoidable, as explained in the
`used_crate.rs` test, but `-Zinstrument-coverage` has new options to
back off support for either unused generics, or all unused functions,
which avoids the notice, at the cost of less coverage of unused
functions.
Fixes: #82875
Invalid LLVM coverage data produced with crate brotli_decompressor
Fixed by disabling the LLVM function attribute that forces inlining, if
`-Z instrument-coverage` is enabled. This attribute is applied to
Rust functions with `#[inline(always)], and in some cases, the forced
inlining breaks coverage instrumentation and reports.
FYI: `@wesleywiser`
r? `@tmandry`
LLVMWrapper: attractive nuisance macros
This came up in the review of #83425: it's hard to imagine a use of
LLVM_VERSION_LE() or LLVM_VERSION_EQ() that's not asking for trouble
when a point release gets created, so let's just discard them to prevent
the issue.
small cleanups in rustc_errors / emitter
This is either moving code around so it gets called less often or using if let instead of match in a few cases.
Add Result::into_err where the Ok variant is the never type
Equivalent of #66045 but for the inverse situation where `T: Into<!>` rather than `E: Into<!>`.
I'm using the same feature gate name. I can't see why one of these methods would be OK to stabilize but not the other.
Tracking issue: #61695
Add documentation for rustdoc-gui tests
I think a bit of documentation doesn't hurt in this case considering how "out of the ordinary" this is.
r? ``@jyn514``
Remove Option::{unwrap_none, expect_none}.
This removes `Option::unwrap_none` and `Option::expect_none` since we're not going to stabilize them, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/62633.
Closes#62633
stabilize debug_non_exhaustive
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/67364
but it is still an open question whether the other `Debug*` struct's should have a similar method. I would guess that would best be put underneath a new feature gate, as this one seems uncontroversial enough to stabilize as is
Fix `new_ret_no_self` false positive
fixes: #1724
changelog: Fix false positive with `new_ret_no_self` when returning `Self` with different generic arguments
Use `EvaluatedToOkModuloRegions` whenever we erase regions
Fixes#80691
When we evaluate a trait predicate, we convert an
`EvaluatedToOk` result to `EvaluatedToOkModuloRegions` if we erased any
regions. We cache the result under a region-erased 'freshened'
predicate, so `EvaluatedToOk` may not be correct for other predicates
that have the same cache key.
