Check that `#[cmse_nonsecure_entry]` is applied to a function definition
This PR fixes#83475. The compiler currently neglects to check whether `#[cmse_nonsecure_entry]` is applied to a function (and not, say, a struct) definition, leading to an ICE later on when the type checker attempts to retrieve the function signature. I have fixed this problem by adding an appropriate check to the `check_attr` pass, so that an error is reported instead of an ICE.
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #86330 (Change how edition based future compatibility warnings are handled)
- #86513 (Rustdoc: Do not list impl when trait has doc(hidden))
- #86592 (Use `#[non_exhaustive]` where appropriate)
- #86608 (chore(rustdoc): remove unused members of RenderType)
- #86624 (Update compiler-builtins)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Use `#[non_exhaustive]` where appropriate
Due to the std/alloc split, it is not possible to make `alloc::collections::TryReserveError::AllocError` non-exhaustive without having an unstable, doc-hidden method to construct (which negates the benefits from `#[non_exhaustive]`).
`@rustbot` label +C-cleanup +T-libs +S-waiting-on-review
rustc_data_structures has a dependency on crossbeam-utils but never uses
it. It appears to have originally had this dependency in order to set
the "nightly" feature; however, its other dependencies use a different
version of crossbeam-utils, so this doesn't actually affect anything.
Furthermore, in current crossbeam-utils, the "nightly" feature has
become a no-op.
The sha-1 and md-5 packages contain crates named sha1 and md5,
respectively. This discrepancy makes it somewhat more challenging to
automate detection of unused crates. Explicitly rename the packages to
the names of the crates they contain, to simplify such detection.
Don't lint :pat when re-parsing a macro from another crate.
`compile_macro` is used both when compiling the original definition in the crate that defines it, and to compile the macro when loading it when compiling a crate that uses it. We should only emit lints in the first case.
This adds a `is_definition: bool` to pass this information in, so we don't warn about things that only concern the definition site.
Fixes#86567
Even if the content from box is used in a sharef-ref context,
we capture the box entirerly.
This is motivated by:
1) We only capture data that is on the stack.
2) Capturing data from within the box might end up moving more data than
the user anticipated.
Fix use placement for suggestions near main.
This fixes an edge case for the suggestion to add a `use`. When running with `--test`, the `main` function will be annotated with an `#[allow(dead_code)]` attribute. The `UsePlacementFinder` would end up using the dummy span of that synthetic attribute. If there are top-level inner attributes, this would place the `use` in the wrong position. The solution here is to ignore attributes with dummy spans.
In the process of working on this, I discovered that the `use_suggestion_placement` test was broken. `UsePlacementFinder` is unaware of active attributes. Attributes like `#[derive]` don't exist in the AST since they are removed. Fixing that is difficult, since the AST does not retain enough information. I considered trying to place the `use` towards the top of the module after any `extern crate` items, but I couldn't find a way to get a span for the start of a module block (the `mod` span starts at the `mod` keyword, and it seems tricky to find the spot just after the opening bracket and past inner attributes). For now, I just put some comments about the issue. This appears to have been a known issue in #44215 where the test for it was introduced, and the fix seemed to be deferred to later.
Due to the std/alloc split, it is not possible to make
`alloc::collections::TryReserveError::AllocError` non-exhaustive without
having an unstable, doc-hidden method to construct (which negates the
benefits from `#[non_exhaustive]`.
Permit zero non-zero-field on transparent types
Fixes#77841
This makes the transparent fields meet the below:
> * A `repr(transparent)` type `T` must meet the following rules:
> * It may have any number of 1-ZST fields
> * In addition, it may have at most one other field of type U
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Support lowercase error codes in `--explain`
This enables `rustc --explain` to accept a lowercase error code. Thus, for instance, `rustc --explain e0573` would be valid after this change, where before a user would have needed to do `rustc --explain E0573`. Although the upper case form of an error code is canonical, the user may prefer the easier-to-type lowercase form, and there's nothing to be gained by forcing them to type the upper case version.
Resolves#86518.
Error code cleanup and enforce checks
Fixes#86097.
It now checks if an error code is unused, and if so, will report an error if the error code wasn't commented out in the `error_codes.rs` file. It also checks that the constant used in the tidy check is up-to-date.
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
Check whether the closure's owner is an ADT in thir-unsafeck
This pull request fixes#85871. The code in `rustc_mir_build/src/check_unsafety.rs` incorrectly assumes that a closure's owner always has a body, but only functions, closures, and constants have bodies, whereas a closure can also appear inside a struct or enum:
```rust
struct S {
arr: [(); match || 1 { _ => 42 }]
}
enum E {
A([(); { || 1; 42 }])
}
```
This pull request fixes the resulting ICE by checking whether the closure's owner is an ADT and only deferring to `thir_check_unsafety(owner)` if it isn't.
