on OpenBSD, some architectures relies on libc++ (from LLVM) and some
others on libestdc++ (particular version of libstdc++ from GCC).
sparc64-unknown-openbsd needs libestdc++ and libgcc (as x86_64 some
years ago). Reintroduce the support of them for openbsd, only for
sparc64 arch. Some others architectures on OpenBSD could use them too.
cleanup: Remove `Spanned` where possible
It generally only makes sense on enums, otherwise it's more convenient to "flatten" it by adding a span field to the struct it wraps.
Test HRTB issue accepted by compiler
Hi! First Rust PR, so if anything needs changing just let me know and I'll take care of it right away.
Closes#50301 which was marked E-needstest
Remove uses of `mem::uninitialized()` from cloudabi
This PR removes uses of `mem::uninitialized` from `cloudabi` module,
excluding the layout test in `src/libstd/sys/cloudabi/abi/cloudabi.rs`.
r? @RalfJung
cc @EdSchouten
cc #62397
Add Catalyst (iOS apps running on macOS) target
This is a first attempt of adding support for the new [Apple Catalyst](https://developer.apple.com/ipad-apps-for-mac/) target (i.e. running iOS apps on macOS). Currently, `rustc` supports the iOS and iOS simulator targets for iOS:
- iOS: ARM cpu, iOS SDK, linked agains the iOS ABI
- Simulator: X86_64 cpu, iOS SDK, linked against the iOS ABI
Apple Catalyst will add an additional target:
- Macabi: X86_64 CPU, iOS SDK, linked again the macOS ABI.
Note, it the actual SDK is the also the macOS 10.15 SDK, but the symbols are the iOS SDK symbols as they were added to macOS with 10.15.
I've collected additional information via links in the open question sections below. This is way out of my comfort zone so please excuse whatever errors I may have made.
# Open Questions:
## Clang Version
It seems to me that `macabi` has not been merged into `clang` yet, I don't know whether that is a requirement rustc to compile, or if it is sufficient if the Clang that is used on a developers system is the correct one supporting macabi (that comes with current Xcode)
## Hardcoded iOS version
`swift-llvm` actually used [x86_64-apple-ios13.0-macabi](3f1fd4f46a) as the target triple which hard-codes the current iOS version. A post on stackoverflow [points out that `MIN_IOS_VERSION` and `MIN_OSX_VERSION` should be used when compiling C code for clang (`-target x86_64-apple-ios${MIN_IOS_VERSION}-macabi`)](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/56487645/how-to-compile-a-3rd-party-library-to-be-used-with-uikit-for-mac-catalyst). However, I wasn't entirely sure how to do that in this PR. Pointers welcome.
## Data Layout
I'm probably using the wrong data-layout. I don't know whether it should be the macOS version or the iOS version. This is probably easier to answer for somebody who understands these things much better than me. I just copied the iOS Simulator X86_64 version as it seems to be (based on what I understand) that Catalyst is just the simulator target build against a different SDK.
# Current State
1. I got it to compile
2. I could successfully compile a `macabi` `libcore` via `cargo build --target x86_64-apple-ios-macabi`
I'm not sure what needs to be done next. Supposedly I need to compile everything into a toolchain somehow that I can then test via `rustup` to make sure that a binary compiled against the toolchain also works with Catalyst. [I read this article, but I'm still lost](https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/5ag60z/how_do_i_bootstrap_rust_to_crosscompile_for_a_new/d9gicr2/) and would love pointers what to do next here.
# Additional Information
- [Commit adding Catalyst support to the Swift Clang Fork](https://github.com/CocoaPods/CocoaPods/issues/8877)
- [Compiling C to Catalyst Discussion](https://github.com/CocoaPods/CocoaPods/issues/8877)
- [CocoaPods Discussion on Adding Catalyst support](https://github.com/CocoaPods/CocoaPods/issues/8877)
Adapt AddRetag for shallow retagging
With https://github.com/rust-lang/miri/pull/872, Miri only retags "bare" references, not those nested in compound types. This adjust `Retag` statement generation to don't emit retags if they are definitely not a bare reference.
I also expanded the mir-opt test to cover the `Retag` in the drop shim, which had previously not been tested.
Add builtin targets for mips64(el)-unknown-linux-muslabi64
This is prerequisite for rust-lang/libc#1449.
Tested locally to produce working static and dynamic binaries, ~~but CI config is untested for now~~ CI is to be added in a follow-up PR.
*edit: dynamic binaries also confirmed working!*
*edit 2: changed triples to include ABI, and removed stray `crt_static_default = false` declarations to be consistent with other musl targets*
Add UWP MSVC targets
Hi,
- The README URI change is the correct one for VS2019 community edition, which I suspect most people would use. Doesn't _need_ to be merged though.
- This 5e6619edd1 fixes the UWP build (msvc or not, doesn't matter). I suspect it broke with recent changes unnoticed because no CI.
- Store lib location is found through the VCToolsInstallDir env variable. The end of the path is currently for the VS2019 store lib locations only.
- I could not test the aarch64_uwp_windows_msvc target because the rust build script does not currently support arm64 msvc AFAIU.
The grouping led to a lot of `mv`. Therefore, some relative paths were
wrong. In this commit the dependent files were also moved so that the paths
work again.
That way, callers don't need to repeat "let's add this to sm manually
for tracking dependencies" trick.
It should make it easier to switch to using `FileLoader` for binary
files in the future as well
Reduce the genericity of closures in the iterator traits
By default, closures inherit the generic parameters of their scope,
including `Self`. However, in most cases, the closures used to implement
iterators don't need to be generic on the iterator type, only its `Item`
type. We can reduce this genericity by redirecting such closures through
local functions.
This does make the closures more cumbersome to write, but it will
hopefully reduce duplication in their monomorphizations, as well as
their related type lengths.
Rollup of 11 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #62984 (Add lint for excess trailing semicolons)
- #63075 (Miri: Check that a ptr is aligned and inbounds already when evaluating `*`)
- #63490 (libsyntax: cleanup and refactor `pat.rs`)
- #63507 (When needing type annotations in local bindings, account for impl Trait and closures)
- #63509 (Point at the right enclosing scope when using `await` in non-async fn)
- #63528 (syntax: Remove `DummyResult::expr_only`)
- #63537 (expand: Unimplement `MutVisitor` on `MacroExpander`)
- #63542 (Add NodeId for Arm, Field and FieldPat)
- #63543 (Merge Variant and Variant_)
- #63560 (move test that shouldn't be in test/run-pass/)
- #63570 (Adjust tracking issues for `MaybeUninit<T>` gates)
Failed merges:
r? @ghost
move test that shouldn't be in test/run-pass/
We no longer test `src/test/run-pass/`; the proper way now is `// run-pass` in `src/test/ui/`
r? @petrochenkov
expand: Unimplement `MutVisitor` on `MacroExpander`
Each call to `fully_expand_fragment` is something unique, interesting, and requiring attention.
It represents a "root" of expansion and its use means that something unusual is happening, like eager expansion or expansion performed outside of the primary expansion pass.
So, it shouldn't hide under a generic visitor call.
Also, from all the implemented visitor methods only two were actually used.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/63468#discussion_r313504119
syntax: Remove `DummyResult::expr_only`
The effect is that if a built-in macro both returns an erroneous AST fragment and is used in unexpected position, then the incorrect position error won't be reported.
This combination of two errors should be rare and isn't worth an extra field that makes people ask questions in comments.
(There wasn't even a test making sure it worked.)
Addresses https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/63468#discussion_r313504644
r? @estebank
