Given a code
```rust
fn foo(x: u8, y: u32) -> bool {
x > y
}
fn main() {}
```
it could be more helpful to provide a suggestion to do "u32::from(x)"
rather than "y.try_into().unwrap()", since the latter may panic.
We do this by passing the LHS of a binary expression up the stack into
the coercion checker.
Closes#73145
Support proc macros in intra doc link resolution
The feature was written pre-proc macro resolution, so it only supported the wacky MBE resolution rules. This adds support for proc macros as well.
cc @GuillaumeGomez
Fixes#73173
Ensure stack when building MIR for matches
In particular matching on complex types such as strings will cause
deep recursion to happen.
Fixes#72933
r? @matthewjasper @oli-obk
Fix `is_const_context`, update `check_for_cast`
A better version of #71477
Adds `fn enclosing_body_owner` and uses it in `is_const_context`.
`is_const_context` now uses the same mechanism as `mir_const_qualif` as it was previously incorrect.
Renames `is_const_context` to `is_inside_const_context`.
I also updated `check_for_cast` in the second commit, so r? @estebank
(I removed one lvl of indentation, so it might be easier to review by hiding whitespace changes)
Relate existential associated types with variance Invariant
Fixes#71550#72315
r? @nikomatsakis
The test case reported in that issue now errors with the following message ...
```
error[E0495]: cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for lifetime parameter 'a in function call due to conflicting requirements
--> /tmp/test.rs:25:5
|
25 | bad(&Bar(PhantomData), x)
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: first, the lifetime cannot outlive the lifetime `'a` as defined on the function body at 24:11...
--> /tmp/test.rs:24:11
|
24 | fn extend<'a, T>(x: &'a T) -> &'static T {
| ^^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> /tmp/test.rs:25:28
|
25 | bad(&Bar(PhantomData), x)
| ^
= note: but, the lifetime must be valid for the static lifetime...
note: ...so that the types are compatible
--> /tmp/test.rs:25:9
|
25 | bad(&Bar(PhantomData), x)
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
= note: expected `&'static T`
found `&T`
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0495`.
```
I could also add that test case if we want to have a weaponized one too.
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #72706 (Add windows group to triagebot)
- #72789 (resolve: Do not suggest imports from the same module in which we are resolving)
- #72890 (improper ctypes: normalize return types and transparent structs)
- #72897 (normalize adt fields during structural match checking)
- #73005 (Don't create impl candidates when obligation contains errors)
- #73023 (Remove noisy suggestion of hash_map )
- #73070 (Add regression test for const generic ICE in #72819)
- #73157 (Don't lose empty `where` clause when pretty-printing)
- #73184 (Reoder order in which MinGW libs are linked to fix recent breakage)
Failed merges:
r? @ghost
Fixes#69977
When we parse a chain of method calls like `foo.a().b().c()`, each
`MethodCallExpr` gets assigned a span that starts at the beginning of
the call chain (`foo`). While this is useful for diagnostics, it means
that `Location::caller` will return the same location for every call
in a call chain.
This PR makes us separately record the span of the function name and
arguments for a method call (e.g. `b()` in `foo.a().b().c()`). This
`Span` is passed through HIR lowering and MIR building to
`TerminatorKind::Call`, where it is used in preference to
`Terminator.source_info.span` when determining `Location::caller`.
This new span is also useful for diagnostics where we want to emphasize
a particular method call - for an example, see
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/72389#discussion_r436035990
