RFC 2008: Future-proofing enums/structs with #[non_exhaustive] attribute
This work-in-progress pull request contains my changes to implement [RFC 2008](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2008). The related tracking issue is #44109.
As of writing, enum-related functionality is not included and there are some issues related to tuple/unit structs. Enum related tests are currently ignored.
WIP PR requested by @nikomatsakis [in Gitter](https://gitter.im/rust-impl-period/WG-compiler-middle?at=59e90e6297cedeb0482ade3e).
DefaultImpl is a highly confusing name for what we now call auto impls,
as in `impl Send for ..`. The name auto impl is not formally decided
but for sanity anything is better than `DefaultImpl` which refers
neither to `default impl` nor to `impl Default`.
Since #42886, macros can create "nonstandard" PatKind::Lit patterns,
that contain path expressions instead of the usual literal expr. These
can cause trouble, including ICEs.
We *could* map these nonstandard patterns to PatKind::Path patterns
during HIR lowering, but that would be much effort for little gain, and
I think is too risky for beta. So let's just forbid them during AST
validation.
Fixes#43250.
In preparation for incremental compilation this commit refactors the lint
handling infrastructure in the compiler to be more "eager" and overall more
incremental-friendly. Many passes of the compiler can emit lints at various
points but before this commit all lints were buffered in a table to be emitted
at the very end of compilation. This commit changes these lints to be emitted
immediately during compilation using pre-calculated lint level-related data
structures.
Linting today is split into two phases, one set of "early" lints run on the
`syntax::ast` and a "late" set of lints run on the HIR. This commit moves the
"early" lints to running as late as possible in compilation, just before HIR
lowering. This notably means that we're catching resolve-related lints just
before HIR lowering. The early linting remains a pass very similar to how it was
before, maintaining context of the current lint level as it walks the tree.
Post-HIR, however, linting is structured as a method on the `TyCtxt` which
transitively executes a query to calculate lint levels. Each request to lint on
a `TyCtxt` will query the entire crate's 'lint level data structure' and then go
from there about whether the lint should be emitted or not.
The query depends on the entire HIR crate but should be very quick to calculate
(just a quick walk of the HIR) and the red-green system should notice that the
lint level data structure rarely changes, and should hopefully preserve
incrementality.
Overall this resulted in a pretty big change to the test suite now that lints
are emitted much earlier in compilation (on-demand vs only at the end). This in
turn necessitated the addition of many `#![allow(warnings)]` directives
throughout the compile-fail test suite and a number of updates to the UI test
suite.
Implement the `loop_break_value` feature.
This implements RFC 1624, tracking issue #37339.
- `FnCtxt` (in typeck) gets a stack of `LoopCtxt`s, which store the
currently deduced type of that loop, the desired type, and a list of
break expressions currently seen. `loop` loops get a fresh type
variable as their initial type (this logic is stolen from that for
arrays). `while` loops get `()`.
- `break {expr}` looks up the broken loop, and unifies the type of
`expr` with the type of the loop.
- `break` with no expr unifies the loop's type with `()`.
- When building MIR, loops no longer construct a `()` value at
termination of the loop; rather, the `break` expression assigns the
result of the loop.
- ~~I have also changed the loop scoping in MIR-building so that the test
of a while loop is not considered to be part of that loop. This makes
the rules consistent with #37360. The new loop scopes in typeck also
follow this rule. That means that `loop { while (break) {} }` now
terminates instead of looping forever. This is technically a breaking
change.~~
- ~~On that note, expressions like `while break {}` and `if break {}` no
longer parse because `{}` is interpreted as an expression argument to
`break`. But no code except compiler test cases should do that anyway
because it makes no sense.~~
- The RFC did not make it clear, but I chose to make `break ()` inside
of a `while` loop illegal, just in case we wanted to do anything with
that design space in the future.
This is my first time dealing with this part of rustc so I'm sure
there's plenty of problems to pick on here ^_^
This implements RFC 1624, tracking issue #37339.
- `FnCtxt` (in typeck) gets a stack of `LoopCtxt`s, which store the
currently deduced type of that loop, the desired type, and a list of
break expressions currently seen. `loop` loops get a fresh type
variable as their initial type (this logic is stolen from that for
arrays). `while` loops get `()`.
- `break {expr}` looks up the broken loop, and unifies the type of
`expr` with the type of the loop.
- `break` with no expr unifies the loop's type with `()`.
- When building MIR, `loop` loops no longer construct a `()` value at
termination of the loop; rather, the `break` expression assigns the
result of the loop. `while` loops are unchanged.
- `break` respects contexts in which expressions may not end with braced
blocks. That is, `while break { break-value } { while-body }` is
illegal; this preserves backwards compatibility.
- The RFC did not make it clear, but I chose to make `break ()` inside
of a `while` loop illegal, just in case we wanted to do anything with
that design space in the future.
This is my first time dealing with this part of rustc so I'm sure
there's plenty of problems to pick on here ^_^
