Update E0138 to new format
Part of #35233Fix#35510
r? @jonathandturner
Question: How can I only underline the function name ? I have observed the debug output and the struct of item, but I can't find the `Span` for function name. Should I modify the struct I get to save function name's position or there is another way to get it ? (I can only find `Span`s for function attributes, inputs, outputs, blocks)
macros: Make metavariables hygienic
This PR makes metavariables hygienic. For example, consider:
```rust
macro_rules! foo {
($x:tt) => { // Suppose that this token tree argument is always a metavariable.
macro_rules! bar { ($x:expr, $y:expr) => { ($x, $y) } }
}
}
fn main() {
foo!($z); // This currently compiles.
foo!($y); // This is an error today but compiles after this PR.
}
```
Today, the `macro_rules! bar { ... }` definition is only valid when the metavariable passed to `foo` is not `$y` (since it unhygienically conflicts with the `$y` in the definition of `bar`) or `$x` (c.f. #35450).
After this PR, the definition of `bar` is always valid (and `bar!(a, b)` always expands to `(a, b)` as expected).
This can break code that was allowed in #34925 (landed two weeks ago). For example,
```rust
macro_rules! outer {
($t:tt) => {
macro_rules! inner { ($i:item) => { $t } }
}
}
outer!($i); // This `$i` should not interact with the `$i` in the definition of `inner!`.
inner!(fn main() {}); // After this PR, this is an error ("unknown macro variable `i`").
```
Due to the severe limitations on nested `macro_rules!` before #34925, this is not a breaking change for stable/beta.
Fixes#35450.
r? @nrc
E0072 update error format
Part of #35233Fixes#35506
r? @jonathandturner
The bonus for this issue currently seems to be impossible to do reliably, as the compiler seems to lack span information for item names alone, like `Foo` in `struct Foo { ... }`. It would be possible to hack something together by computing span offsets, but that seems like a solution that would be begging for trouble.
A proper solution to this would, of course, be to add span information to the right place (seems to be `rustc::hir::Item::name` but I may be wrong).
Update E0038 to the new error format
Part of #35233
Addresses #35500
"r? @jonathandturner
This doesn't compile yet, and I need help. In my naive solution, adding the span label makes our error message a mutable `errors::DiagnosticBuilder` pointer.
```bash
python src/bootstrap/bootstrap.py --step check-cfail E0038 --stage 1
```
```
Building stage0 std artifacts (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Building stage0 test artifacts (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Building stage0 compiler artifacts (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu -> x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Compiling rustc v0.0.0 (file:///home/nash/code/rust/src/librustc)
src/librustc/traits/error_reporting.rs:735:9: 735:12 error: mismatched types [E0308]
src/librustc/traits/error_reporting.rs:735 err
^~~
src/librustc/traits/error_reporting.rs:735:9: 735:12 help: run `rustc --explain E0308` to see a detailed explanation
src/librustc/traits/error_reporting.rs:735:9: 735:12 note: expected type `core::option::Option<errors::DiagnosticBuilder<'tcx>>`
src/librustc/traits/error_reporting.rs:735:9: 735:12 note: found type `core::option::Option<&mut errors::DiagnosticBuilder<'_>>`
error: aborting due to previous error
error: Could not compile `rustc`.
To learn more, run the command again with --verbose.
command did not execute successfully: "/home/nash/code/rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage0/bin/cargo" "build" "-j" "4" "--target" "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" "--release" "--features" " jemalloc" "--manifest-path" "/home/nash/code/rust/src/rustc/Cargo.toml"
expected success, got: exit code: 101
```
Update e0017 to new format
Updated `span_err!` to use `struct_span_err!` and provide a `span_label` that describes the error in context.
Updated the test to look for the `span_label`s that are provided now.
