Teach parser to understand fake anonymous enum syntax
Parse `Ty | OtherTy` in function argument and return types.
Parse type ascription in top level patterns.
Minimally address #100741.
Adds an additional hint to failures where we encounter an else keyword
while we're parsing an if-let block.
This is likely that the user has accidentally mixed if-let and let...else
together.
Recognise double-equals homoglyph
Recognise `⩵` as a homoglyph for `==`.
The first commit switches `char` to `&str`, as all previous homoglyphs corresponded to a single ASCII character, while the second implements the fix.
`@rustbot` label +A-diagnostics +A-parser
make error emitted on `impl &Trait` nicer
Fixes#106694
Turned out to be simpler than I thought, also added UI test.
Before: ([playground](https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=9bda53271ef3a8886793cf427b8cea91))
```text
error: expected one of `:`, ``@`,` or `|`, found `)`
--> src/main.rs:2:22
|
2 | fn foo(_: impl &Trait) {}
| ^ expected one of `:`, ``@`,` or `|`
|
= note: anonymous parameters are removed in the 2018 edition (see RFC 1685)
help: if this is a parameter name, give it a type
|
2 | fn foo(_: impl Trait: &TypeName) {}
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
help: if this is a type, explicitly ignore the parameter name
|
2 | fn foo(_: impl _: &Trait) {}
| ++
error: expected one of `!`, `(`, `)`, `,`, `?`, `for`, `~`, lifetime, or path, found `&`
--> src/main.rs:2:16
|
2 | fn foo(_: impl &Trait) {}
| -^ expected one of 9 possible tokens
| |
| help: missing `,`
error: expected one of `!`, `(`, `,`, `=`, `>`, `?`, `for`, `~`, lifetime, or path, found `&`
--> src/main.rs:3:11
|
3 | fn bar<T: &Trait>(_: T) {}
| ^ expected one of 10 possible tokens
```
After:
```text
error: expected a trait, found type
--> <anon>:2:16
|
2 | fn foo(_: impl &Trait) {}
| -^^^^^
| |
| help: consider removing the indirection
error: expected a trait, found type
--> <anon>:3:11
|
3 | fn bar<T: &Trait>(_: T) {}
| -^^^^^
| |
| help: consider removing the indirection
```
Emit only one nbsp error per file
Fixes#106101.
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/106098 for an explanation of how someone would end up with a large number of these nbsp characters in their source code, which is why I think rustc needs to handle this specific case in a friendlier way.
Emit a single error for contiguous sequences of unknown tokens
Closes#106101
On encountering a sequence of identical source characters which are unknown tokens, note the amount of subsequent characters and advance past them silently. The old behavior was to emit an error and 'help' note for every single one.
`@rustbot` label +A-diagnostics +A-parser
Recover from where clauses placed before tuple struct bodies
Open to any suggestions regarding the phrasing of the diagnostic.
Fixes#100790.
`@rustbot` label A-diagnostics
r? diagnostics
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #104531 (Provide a better error and a suggestion for `Fn` traits with lifetime params)
- #105899 (`./x doc library --open` opens `std`)
- #106190 (Account for multiple multiline spans with empty padding)
- #106202 (Trim more paths in obligation types)
- #106234 (rustdoc: simplify settings, help, and copy button CSS by not reusing)
- #106236 (docs/test: add docs and a UI test for `E0514` and `E0519`)
- #106259 (Update Clippy)
- #106260 (Fix index out of bounds issues in rustdoc)
- #106263 (Formatter should not try to format non-Rust files)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Currently, given `Fn`-family traits with lifetime params like
`Fn<'a>(&'a str) -> bool`, many unhelpful errors show up. These are a
bit confusing.
This commit allows these situations to suggest simply using
higher-ranked trait bounds like `for<'a> Fn(&'a str) -> bool`.
Properly calculate best failure in macro matching
Previously, we used spans. This was not good. Sometimes, the span of the token that failed to match may come from a position later in the file which has been transcribed into a token stream way earlier in the file. If precisely this token fails to match, we think that it was the best match because its span is so high, even though other arms might have gotten further in the token stream.
We now try to properly use the location in the token stream.
This needs a little cleanup as the `best_failure` field is getting out of hand but it should be mostly good to go. I hope I didn't violate too many abstraction boundaries..
Always suggest as `MachineApplicable` in `recover_intersection_pat`
This resolves one FIXME in `recover_intersection_pat` by always applying `MachineApplicable` when suggesting, as `bindings_after_at` is now stable.
This also separates a test to apply `// run-rustfix`.
Signed-off-by: Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
