Extend `proc_macro_back_compat` lint to `procedural-masquerade`
We now lint on *any* use of `procedural-masquerade` crate. While this
crate still exists, its main reverse dependency (`cssparser`) no longer
depends on it. Any crates still depending off should stop doing so, as
it only exists to support very old Rust versions.
If a crate actually needs to support old versions of rustc via
`procedural-masquerade`, then they'll just need to accept the warning
until we remove it entirely (at the same time as the back-compat hack).
The latest version of `procedural-masquerade` does work with the
latest rustc, but trying to check for the version seems like more
trouble than it's worth.
While working on this, I realized that the `proc-macro-hack` check was
never actually doing anything. The corresponding enum variant in
`proc-macro-hack` is named `Value` or `Nested` - it has never been
called `Input`. Due to a strange Crater issue, the Crater run that
tested adding this did *not* end up testing it - some of the crates that
would have failed did not actually have their tests checked, making it
seem as though the `proc-macro-hack` check was working.
The Crater issue is being discussed at
https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/242791-t-infra/topic/Nearly.20identical.20Crater.20runs.20processed.20a.20crate.20differently/near/230406661
Despite the `proc-macro-hack` check not actually doing anything, we
haven't gotten any reports from users about their build being broken.
I went ahead and removed it entirely, since it's clear that no one is
being affected by the `proc-macro-hack` regression in practice.
Make source-based code coverage compatible with MIR inlining
When codegenning code coverage use the instance that coverage data was
originally generated for, to ensure basic level of compatibility with
MIR inlining.
Fixes#83061
Add more links between hash and btree collections
- Link from `core::hash` to `HashMap` and `HashSet`
- Link from HashMap and HashSet to the module-level documentation on
when to use the collection
- Link from several collections to Wikipedia articles on the general
concept
See also https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/81989#issuecomment-783920840.
Emit error when trying to use assembler syntax directives in `asm!`
The `.intel_syntax` and `.att_syntax` assembler directives should not be used, in favor of not specifying a syntax for intel, and in favor of the explicit `att_syntax` option using the inline assembly options.
Closes#79869
Vec::dedup_by optimization
Now `Vec::dedup_by` drops items in-place as it goes through them.
From my benchmarks, it is around 10% faster when T is small, with no major regression when otherwise.
I used `ptr::copy` instead of conditional `ptr::copy_nonoverlapping`, because the latter had some weird performance issues on my ryzen laptop (it was 50% slower on it than on intel/sandybridge laptop)
It would be good if someone was able to reproduce these results.
`Vec` can hold up to `usize::MAX` ZST items, but `VecDeque` has a lower
limit to keep its raw capacity as a power of two, so we should check
that in `From<Vec<T>> for VecDeque<T>`. We can also simplify the
capacity check for the remaining non-ZST case.
Before this fix, the new test would fail on the length:
```
thread 'collections::vec_deque::tests::test_from_vec_zst_overflow' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)`
left: `0`,
right: `9223372036854775808`', library/alloc/src/collections/vec_deque/tests.rs:474:5
note: panic did not contain expected string
panic message: `"assertion failed: `(left == right)`\n left: `0`,\n right: `9223372036854775808`"`,
expected substring: `"capacity overflow"`
```
That was a result of `len()` using a mask `& (size - 1)` with the
improper length. Now we do get a "capacity overflow" panic as soon as
that `VecDeque::from(vec)` is attempted.
Deprecate `intrinsics::drop_in_place` and `collections::Bound`, which accidentally weren't deprecated
Fixes#82080.
I've taken the liberty of updating the `since` values to 1.52, since an unobservable deprecation isn't much of a deprecation (even the detailed release notes never bothered to mention these deprecations).
As mentioned in the issue I'm *pretty* sure that using a type alias for `Bound` is semantically equivalent to the re-export; [the reference implies](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/items/type-aliases.html) that type aliases only observably differ from types when used on unit structs or tuple structs, whereas `Bound` is an enum.
Deprecate `intrinsics::drop_in_place` and `collections::Bound`, which accidentally weren't deprecated
Fixes#82080.
I've taken the liberty of updating the `since` values to 1.52, since an unobservable deprecation isn't much of a deprecation (even the detailed release notes never bothered to mention these deprecations).
As mentioned in the issue I'm *pretty* sure that using a type alias for `Bound` is semantically equivalent to the re-export; [the reference implies](https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/items/type-aliases.html) that type aliases only observably differ from types when used on unit structs or tuple structs, whereas `Bound` is an enum.
ast/hir: Rename field-related structures
I always forget what `ast::Field` and `ast::StructField` mean despite working with AST for long time, so this PR changes the naming to less confusing and more consistent.
- `StructField` -> `FieldDef` ("field definition")
- `Field` -> `ExprField` ("expression field", not "field expression")
- `FieldPat` -> `PatField` ("pattern field", not "field pattern")
Various visiting and other methods working with the fields are renamed correspondingly too.
The second commit reduces the size of `ExprKind` by boxing fields of `ExprKind::Struct` in preparation for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80080.
ast/hir: Rename field-related structures
I always forget what `ast::Field` and `ast::StructField` mean despite working with AST for long time, so this PR changes the naming to less confusing and more consistent.
- `StructField` -> `FieldDef` ("field definition")
- `Field` -> `ExprField` ("expression field", not "field expression")
- `FieldPat` -> `PatField` ("pattern field", not "field pattern")
Various visiting and other methods working with the fields are renamed correspondingly too.
The second commit reduces the size of `ExprKind` by boxing fields of `ExprKind::Struct` in preparation for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80080.
Don't lint on `Result` and `Option` types.
Considers `or` patterns.
Considers variants prefixed with `Self`
Suggestions will try to find a common prefix rather than just using the full path
Don't re-export `clippy_utils::*`
changelog: none
This should wrap up the utils-related really big changes. I personally don't see any more sub-modules to be added to `clippy_utils`.
