Refactor path segment parameter error
This PR attempts to rewrite the error handling for an unexpected parenthesised type parameters to:
- Use provided data instead of re-parsing the whole span
- Add a multipart suggestion to reflect on the changes with an underline
- Remove the unnecessary "if" nesting
Make `ExprKind::Closure` a struct variant.
Simple refactor since we both need it to introduce additional fields in `ExprKind::Closure`.
r? ``@Aaron1011``
Remove label/lifetime shadowing warnings
This PR removes some pre-1.0 shadowing warnings for labels and lifetimes.
The current behaviour of the compiler is to warn
* labels that shadow unrelated labels in the same function --> removed
```rust
'a: loop {}
'a: loop {} // STOP WARNING
```
* labels that shadow enclosing labels --> kept, but only if shadowing is hygienic
```rust
'a: loop {
'a: loop {} // KEEP WARNING
}
```
* labels that shadow lifetime --> removed
```rust
fn foo<'a>() {
'a: loop {} // STOP WARNING
}
```
* lifetimes that shadow labels --> removed
```rust
'a: loop {
let b = Box::new(|x: &i8| *x) as Box<dyn for <'a> Fn(&'a i8) -> i8>; // STOP WARNING
}
```
* lifetimes that shadow lifetimes --> kept
```rust
fn foo<'a>() {
let b = Box::new(|x: &i8| *x) as Box<dyn for <'a> Fn(&'a i8) -> i8>; // KEEP WARNING
}
```
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/31745.
-----
From `@petrochenkov` in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/95781#issuecomment-1105199014
> I think we should remove these silly checks entirely.
> They were introduced long time ago in case some new language features appear and require this space.
> Now we have another mechanism for such language changes - editions, and if "lifetimes in expressions" or something like that needs to be introduced it could be introduced as an edition change.
> However, there was no plans to introduce anything like for years, so it's unlikely that even the edition mechanism will be necessary.
r? rust-lang/lang
This commit adds an alternative content boxing syntax,
and uses it inside alloc.
The usage inside the very performance relevant code in
liballoc is the only remaining relevant usage of box syntax
in the compiler (outside of tests, which are comparatively
easy to port).
box syntax was originally designed to be used by all Rust
developers. This introduces a replacement syntax more tailored
to only being used inside the Rust compiler, and with it,
lays the groundwork for eventually removing box syntax.
