Automated conversion using the untry tool [1] and the following command:
```
$ find -name '*.rs' -type f | xargs untry
```
at the root of the Rust repo.
[1]: https://github.com/japaric/untry
emit (via debug!) scary message from `fn borrowck_mir` until basic
prototype is in place.
Gather children of move paths and set their kill bits in
dataflow. (Each node has a link to the child that is first among its
siblings.)
Hooked in libgraphviz based rendering, including of borrowck dataflow
state.
doing this well required some refactoring of the code, so I cleaned it
up more generally (adding comments to explain what its trying to do
and how it is doing it).
Update: this newer version addresses most review comments (at least
the ones that were largely mechanical changes), but I left the more
interesting revisions to separate followup commits (in this same PR).
typestrong const integers
~~It would be great if someone could run crater on this PR, as this has a high danger of breaking valid code~~ Crater ran. Good to go.
----
So this PR does a few things:
1. ~~const eval array values when const evaluating an array expression~~
2. ~~const eval repeat value when const evaluating a repeat expression~~
3. ~~const eval all struct and tuple fields when evaluating a struct/tuple expression~~
4. remove the `ConstVal::Int` and `ConstVal::Uint` variants and replace them with a single enum (`ConstInt`) which has variants for all integral types
* `usize`/`isize` are also enums with variants for 32 and 64 bit. At creation and various usage steps there are assertions in place checking if the target bitwidth matches with the chosen enum variant
5. enum discriminants (`ty::Disr`) are now `ConstInt`
6. trans has its own `Disr` type now (newtype around `u64`)
This obviously can't be done without breaking changes (the ones that are noticable in stable)
We could probably write lints that find those situations and error on it for a cycle or two. But then again, those situations are rare and really bugs imo anyway:
```rust
let v10 = 10 as i8;
let v4 = 4 as isize;
assert_eq!(v10 << v4 as usize, 160 as i8);
```
stops compiling because 160 is not a valid i8
```rust
struct S<T, S> {
a: T,
b: u8,
c: S
}
let s = S { a: 0xff_ff_ff_ffu32, b: 1, c: 0xaa_aa_aa_aa as i32 };
```
stops compiling because `0xaa_aa_aa_aa` is not a valid i32
----
cc @eddyb @pnkfelix
related: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/issues/1071
Add Pass manager for MIR
A new PR, since rebasing the original one (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/31448) properly was a pain. Since then there has been several changes most notable of which:
1. Removed the pretty-printing with `#[rustc_mir(graphviz/pretty)]`, mostly because we now have `--unpretty=mir`, IMHO that’s the direction we should expand this functionality into;
2. Reverted the infercx change done for typeck, because typeck can make an infercx for itself by being a `MirMapPass`
r? @nikomatsakis
There's a lot of stuff wrong with the representation of these types:
TyFnDef doesn't actually uniquely identify a function, TyFnPtr is used to
represent method calls, TyFnDef in the sub-expression of a cast isn't
correctly reified, and probably some other stuff I haven't discovered yet.
Splitting them seems like the right first step, though.
This PR implements [RFC 1192](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1192-inclusive-ranges.md), which is triple-dot syntax for inclusive range expressions. The new stuff is behind two feature gates (one for the syntax and one for the std::ops types). This replaces the deprecated functionality in std::iter. Along the way I simplified the desugaring for all ranges.
This is my first contribution to rust which changes more than one character outside of a test or comment, so please review carefully! Some of the individual commit messages have more of my notes. Also thanks for putting up with my dumb questions in #rust-internals.
- For implementing `std::ops::RangeInclusive`, I took @Stebalien's suggestion from https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1192#issuecomment-137864421. It seemed to me to make the implementation easier and increase type safety. If that stands, the RFC should be amended to avoid confusion.
- I also kind of like @glaebhoerl's [idea](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/1254#issuecomment-147815299), which is unified inclusive/exclusive range syntax something like `x>..=y`. We can experiment with this while everything is behind a feature gate.
- There are a couple of FIXMEs left (see the last commit). I didn't know what to do about `RangeArgument` and I haven't added `Index` impls yet. Those should be discussed/finished before merging.
cc @Gankro since you [complained](https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/3xkfro/what_happened_to_inclusive_ranges/cy5j0yq)
cc #27777#30877rust-lang/rust#1192rust-lang/rfcs#1254
relevant to #28237 (tracking issue)
Zeroing on-drop seems to work fine. Still thinking about the best way to approach zeroing on-move.
(based on top of the other drop PR; only the last 2 commits are relevant)
A whole bunch of stuff gets folded into struct handling! Plus, removes
an ugly hack from trans and accidentally fixes a bug with constructing
ranges from references (see later commits with tests).
In MIR we previously tried to match `let x in { exprs; let y in { exprs; }}` with our data
structures which is rather unwieldy, espeicially because it requires some sort of recursion or
stack to process, while, a flat list of statements is enough – lets only relinquish their lifetime
at the end of the block (i.e. end of the list).
Also fixes#31853.
