Consolidate exhaustiveness-related tests
I hunted for tests that only exercised the match exhaustiveness algorithm and regrouped them. I also improved integer-range tests since I had found them lacking while hacking around.
The interest is mainly so that one can pass `--test-args patterns` and catch most relevant tests.
r? `@varkor`
`@rustbot` modify labels: +A-exhaustiveness-checking
Move capture lowering from THIR to MIR
This allows us to:
- Handle precise Places captured by a closure directly in MIR. Handling
captures in MIR is easier since we can rely on/ tweak PlaceBuilder to
generate `mir::Place`s that resemble how we store captures (`hir::Place`).
- Handle `let _ = x` case when feature `capture_disjoint_fields`
is enabled directly in MIR. This is required to be done in MIR since
patterns are desugared in MIR.
Closes: rust-lang/project-rfc-2229#25
r? ```@nikomatsakis```
Handle empty matches cleanly in exhaustiveness checking
This removes the special-casing of empty matches that was done in `check_match`. This fixes most of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/55123.
Somewhat unrelatedly, I also made `_match.rs` more self-contained, because I think it's cleaner.
r? `@varkor`
`@rustbot` modify labels: +A-exhaustiveness-checking
ExprKind::SelfRef was used to express accessing `self` in
the desugared Closure/Generator struct when lowering captures in THIR.
Since we handle captures in MIR now, we don't need `ExprKind::Self`.
This allows us to:
- Handle precise Places captured by a closure directly in MIR. Handling
captures in MIR is easier since we can rely on/ tweak PlaceBuilder to
generate `mir::Place`s that resemble how we store captures (`hir::Place`).
- Allows us to handle `let _ = x` case when feature `capture_disjoint_fields`
is enabled directly in MIR. This is required to be done in MIR since
patterns are desugared in MIR.
RFC-2229: Implement Precise Capture Analysis
### This PR introduces
- Feature gate for RFC-2229 (incomplete) `capture_disjoint_field`
- Rustc Attribute to print out the capture analysis `rustc_capture_analysis`
- Precise capture analysis
### Description of the analysis
1. If the feature gate is not set then all variables that are not local to the closure will be added to the list of captures. (This is for backcompat)
2. The rest of the analysis is based entirely on how the captured `Place`s are used within the closure. Precise information (i.e. projections) about the `Place` is maintained throughout.
3. To reduce the amount of information we need to keep track of, we do a minimization step. In this step, we determine a list such that no Place within this list represents an ancestor path to another entry in the list. Check rust-lang/project-rfc-2229#9 for more detailed examples.
4. To keep the compiler functional as before we implement a Bridge between the results of this new analysis to existing data structures used for closure captures. Note the new capture analysis results are only part of MaybeTypeckTables that is the information is only available during typeck-ing.
### Known issues
- Statements like `let _ = x` will make the compiler ICE when used within a closure with the feature enabled. More generally speaking the issue is caused by `let` statements that create no bindings and are init'ed using a Place expression.
### Testing
We removed the code that would handle the case where the feature gate is not set, to enable the feature as default and did a bors try and perf run. More information here: #78762
### Thanks
This has been slowly in the works for a while now.
I want to call out `@Azhng` `@ChrisPardy` `@null-sleep` `@jenniferwills` `@logmosier` `@roxelo` for working on this and the previous PRs that led up to this, `@nikomatsakis` for guiding us.
Closesrust-lang/project-rfc-2229#7Closesrust-lang/project-rfc-2229#9Closesrust-lang/project-rfc-2229#6Closesrust-lang/project-rfc-2229#19
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Allow making `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP` conditional on the crate name
Motivation: This came up in the [Zulip stream](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/233931-t-compiler.2Fmajor-changes/topic/Require.20users.20to.20confirm.20they.20know.20RUSTC_.E2.80.A6.20compiler-team.23350/near/208403962) for https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/350.
See also https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/6608#issuecomment-458546258; this implements https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/6627.
The goal is for this to eventually allow prohibiting setting `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP` in build.rs (https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/7088).
## User-facing changes
- `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=1` still works; there is no current plan to remove this.
- Things like `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=0` no longer activate nightly features. In practice this shouldn't be a big deal, since `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP` is the opposite of stable and everyone uses `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=1` anyway.
- `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=x` will enable nightly features only for crate `x`.
- `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=x,y` will enable nightly features only for crates `x` and `y`.
## Implementation changes
The main change is that `UnstableOptions::from_environment` now requires
an (optional) crate name. If the crate name is unknown (`None`), then the new feature is not available and you still have to use `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=1`. In practice this means the feature is only available for `--crate-name`, not for `#![crate_name]`; I'm interested in supporting the second but I'm not sure how.
Other major changes:
- Added `Session::is_nightly_build()`, which uses the `crate_name` of
the session
- Added `nightly_options::match_is_nightly_build`, a convenience method
for looking up `--crate-name` from CLI arguments.
`Session::is_nightly_build()`should be preferred where possible, since
it will take into account `#![crate_name]` (I think).
- Added `unstable_features` to `rustdoc::RenderOptions`
I'm not sure whether this counts as T-compiler or T-lang; _technically_ RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP is an implementation detail, but it's been used so much it seems like this counts as a language change too.
r? `@joshtriplett`
cc `@Mark-Simulacrum` `@hsivonen`
Implement destructuring assignment for tuples
This is the first step towards implementing destructuring assignment (RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2909, tracking issue: #71126). This PR is the first part of #71156, which was split up to allow for easier review.
Quick summary: This change allows destructuring the LHS of an assignment if it's a (possibly nested) tuple.
It is implemented via a desugaring (AST -> HIR lowering) as follows:
```rust
(a,b) = (1,2)
```
... becomes ...
```rust
{
let (lhs0,lhs1) = (1,2);
a = lhs0;
b = lhs1;
}
```
Thanks to `@varkor` who helped with the implementation, particularly around default binding modes.
r? `@petrochenkov`
The main change is that `UnstableOptions::from_environment` now requires
an (optional) crate name. If the crate name is unknown (`None`), then the new feature is not available and you still have to use `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=1`. In practice this means the feature is only available for `--crate-name`, not for `#![crate_name]`; I'm interested in supporting the second but I'm not sure how.
Other major changes:
- Added `Session::is_nightly_build()`, which uses the `crate_name` of
the session
- Added `nightly_options::match_is_nightly_build`, a convenience method
for looking up `--crate-name` from CLI arguments.
`Session::is_nightly_build()`should be preferred where possible, since
it will take into account `#![crate_name]` (I think).
- Added `unstable_features` to `rustdoc::RenderOptions`
There is a user-facing change here: things like `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=0` no
longer active nightly features. In practice this shouldn't be a big
deal, since `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP` is the opposite of stable and everyone
uses `RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=1` anyway.
- Add tests
Check against `Cheat`, not whether nightly features are allowed.
Nightly features are always allowed on the nightly channel.
- Only call `is_nightly_build()` once within a function
- Use booleans consistently for rustc_incremental
Sessions can't be passed through threads, so `read_file` couldn't take a
session. To be consistent, also take a boolean in `write_file_header`.
Fix unreachable sub-branch detection in or-patterns
The previous implementation was too eager to avoid unnecessary "unreachable pattern" warnings. I feel more confident about this implementation than I felt about the previous one.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76836.
``@rustbot`` modify labels: +A-exhaustiveness-checking
reverse binding order in matches to allow the subbinding of copyable fields in bindings after @
Fixes#69971
### TODO
- [x] Regression tests
r? `@oli-obk`
Fix#78549
Before #78430, this worked because `specialize_constructor` didn't actually care too much which constructor was passed to it unless needed. That PR however handles `&str` as a special case, and I did not anticipate patterns for the `&str` type other than string literals.
I am not very confident there are not other similar oversights left, but hopefully only `&str` was different enough to break my assumptions.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/78549
Before #78430, string literals worked because `specialize_constructor`
didn't actually care too much which constructor was passed to it unless
needed. Since then, string literals are special cased and a bit hacky. I
did not anticipate patterns for the `&str` type other than string
literals, hence this bug. This makes string literals less hacky.
