Match ergonomics 2024: Implement TC's match ergonomics proposal
Under gate `ref_pat_eat_one_layer_2024_structural`. Enabling `ref_pat_eat_one_layer_2024` at the same time allows the union of what the individual gates allow. `@traviscross`
r? `@Nadrieril`
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123076
`@rustbot` label A-edition-2024 A-patterns
patchable-function-entry: Add unstable compiler flag and attribute
Tracking issue: #123115
Add the -Z patchable-function-entry compiler flag and the #[patchable_function_entry(prefix_nops = m, entry_nops = n)] attribute.
Rebased and adjusted the canditate implementation to match changes in the RFC.
Under gate `ref_pat_eat_one_layer_2024_structural`.
Enabling `ref_pat_eat_one_layer_2024` at the same time allows the union
of what the individual gates allow.
coverage: Overhaul validation of the `#[coverage(..)]` attribute
This PR makes sweeping changes to how the (currently-unstable) coverage attribute is validated:
- Multiple coverage attributes on the same item/expression are now treated as an error.
- The attribute must always be `#[coverage(off)]` or `#[coverage(on)]`, and the error messages for this are more consistent.
- A trailing comma is still allowed after off/on, since that's part of the normal attribute syntax.
- Some places that silently ignored a coverage attribute now produce an error instead.
- These cases were all clearly bugs.
- Some places that ignored a coverage attribute (with a warning) now produce an error instead.
- These were originally added as lints, but I don't think it makes much sense to knowingly allow new attributes to be used in meaningless places.
- Some of these errors might soon disappear, if it's easy to extend recursive coverage attributes to things like modules and impl blocks.
---
One of the goals of this PR is to lay a more solid foundation for making the coverage attribute recursive, so that it applies to all nested functions/closures instead of just the one it is directly attached to.
Fixes#126658.
This PR incorporates #126659, which adds more tests for validation of the coverage attribute.
`@rustbot` label +A-code-coverage
SmartPointer derive-macro
<!--
If this PR is related to an unstable feature or an otherwise tracked effort,
please link to the relevant tracking issue here. If you don't know of a related
tracking issue or there are none, feel free to ignore this.
This PR will get automatically assigned to a reviewer. In case you would like
a specific user to review your work, you can assign it to them by using
r? <reviewer name>
-->
Possibly replacing #123472 for continued upkeep of the proposal rust-lang/rfcs#3621 and implementation of the tracking issue #123430.
cc `@Darksonn` `@wedsonaf`
It might make sense to allow this in the future, if we add values that aren't
mutually exclusive, but for now having multiple coverage attributes on one item
is useless.
Add hard error and migration lint for unsafe attrs
More implementation work for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123757
This adds the migration lint for unsafe attributes, as well as making it a hard error in Rust 2024.
Remove use of const traits (and `feature(effects)`) from stdlib
The current uses are already unsound because they are using non-const impls in const contexts. We can reintroduce them by reverting the commit in this PR, after #120639 lands.
Also, make `effects` an incomplete feature.
cc `@rust-lang/project-const-traits`
r? `@compiler-errors`
Stabilise `c_unwind`
Fix#74990Fix#115285 (that's also where FCP is happening)
Marking as draft PR for now due to `compiler_builtins` issues
r? `@Amanieu`
Place tail expression behind terminating scope
This PR implements #123739 so that we can do further experiments in nightly.
A little rewrite has been applied to `for await` lowering. It was previously `unsafe { Pin::unchecked_new(into_async_iter(..)) }`. Under the edition 2024 rule, however, `into_async_iter` gets dropped at the end of the `unsafe` block. This presumably the first Edition 2024 migration rule goes by hoisting `into_async_iter(..)` into `match` one level above, so it now looks like the following.
```rust
match into_async_iter($iter_expr) {
ref mut iter => match unsafe { Pin::unchecked_new(iter) } {
...
}
}
```
Add a new concat metavar expr
Revival of #111930
Giving it another try now that #117050 was merged.
With the new rules, meta-variable expressions must be referenced with a dollar sign (`$`) and this can cause misunderstands with `$concat`.
```rust
macro_rules! foo {
( $bar:ident ) => {
const ${concat(VAR, bar)}: i32 = 1;
};
}
// Will produce `VARbar` instead of `VAR_123`
foo!(_123);
```
In other words, forgetting the dollar symbol can produce undesired outputs.
cc #29599
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/124225
We already do this for a number of crates, e.g. `rustc_middle`,
`rustc_span`, `rustc_metadata`, `rustc_span`, `rustc_errors`.
For the ones we don't, in many cases the attributes are a mess.
- There is no consistency about order of attribute kinds (e.g.
`allow`/`deny`/`feature`).
- Within attribute kind groups (e.g. the `feature` attributes),
sometimes the order is alphabetical, and sometimes there is no
particular order.
- Sometimes the attributes of a particular kind aren't even grouped
all together, e.g. there might be a `feature`, then an `allow`, then
another `feature`.
This commit extends the existing sorting to all compiler crates,
increasing consistency. If any new attribute line is added there is now
only one place it can go -- no need for arbitrary decisions.
Exceptions:
- `rustc_log`, `rustc_next_trait_solver` and `rustc_type_ir_macros`,
because they have no crate attributes.
- `rustc_codegen_gcc`, because it's quasi-external to rustc (e.g. it's
ignored in `rustfmt.toml`).
Match ergonomics 2024: align implementation with RFC
- Remove eat-two-layers (`ref_pat_everywhere`)
- Consolidate `mut_preserve_binding_mode_2024` into `ref_pat_eat_one_layer_2024`
- `&mut` no longer peels off `&`
- Apply "no `ref mut` behind `&`" rule on all editions with `ref_pat_eat_one_layer_2024`
- Require `mut_ref` feature gate for all mutable by-reference bindings
r? ``@Nadrieril``
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123076
``@rustbot`` label A-edition-2024 A-patterns
Add tracking issue and unstable book page for `"vectorcall"` ABI
Originally added in 2015 by #30567, the Windows `"vectorcall"` ABI didn't have a tracking issue until now.
Tracking issue: #124485
Stabilize `custom_code_classes_in_docs` feature
Fixes#79483.
This feature has been around for quite some time now, I think it's fine to stabilize it now.
## Summary
## What is the feature about?
In short, this PR changes two things, both related to codeblocks in doc comments in Rust documentation:
* Allow to disable generation of `language-*` CSS classes with the `custom` attribute.
* Add your own CSS classes to a code block so that you can use other tools to highlight them.
#### The `custom` attribute
Let's start with the new `custom` attribute: it will disable the generation of the `language-*` CSS class on the generated HTML code block. For example:
```rust
/// ```custom,c
/// int main(void) {
/// return 0;
/// }
/// ```
```
The generated HTML code block will not have `class="language-c"` because the `custom` attribute has been set. The `custom` attribute becomes especially useful with the other thing added by this feature: adding your own CSS classes.
#### Adding your own CSS classes
The second part of this feature is to allow users to add CSS classes themselves so that they can then add a JS library which will do it (like `highlight.js` or `prism.js`), allowing to support highlighting for other languages than Rust without increasing burden on rustdoc. To disable the automatic `language-*` CSS class generation, you need to use the `custom` attribute as well.
This allow users to write the following:
```rust
/// Some code block with `{class=language-c}` as the language string.
///
/// ```custom,{class=language-c}
/// int main(void) {
/// return 0;
/// }
/// ```
fn main() {}
```
This will notably produce the following HTML:
```html
<pre class="language-c">
int main(void) {
return 0;
}</pre>
```
Instead of:
```html
<pre class="rust rust-example-rendered">
<span class="ident">int</span> <span class="ident">main</span>(<span class="ident">void</span>) {
<span class="kw">return</span> <span class="number">0</span>;
}
</pre>
```
To be noted, we could have written `{.language-c}` to achieve the same result. `.` and `class=` have the same effect.
One last syntax point: content between parens (`(like this)`) is now considered as comment and is not taken into account at all.
In addition to this, I added an `unknown` field into `LangString` (the parsed code block "attribute") because of cases like this:
```rust
/// ```custom,class:language-c
/// main;
/// ```
pub fn foo() {}
```
Without this `unknown` field, it would generate in the DOM: `<pre class="language-class:language-c language-c">`, which is quite bad. So instead, it now stores all unknown tags into the `unknown` field and use the first one as "language". So in this case, since there is no unknown tag, it'll simply generate `<pre class="language-c">`. I added tests to cover this.
EDIT(camelid): This description is out-of-date. Using `custom,class:language-c` will generate the output `<pre class="language-class:language-c">` as would be expected; it treats `class:language-c` as just the name of a language (similar to the langstring `c` or `js` or what have you) since it does not use the designed class syntax.
Finally, I added a parser for the codeblock attributes to make it much easier to maintain. It'll be pretty easy to extend.
As to why this syntax for adding attributes was picked: it's [Pandoc's syntax](https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#extension-fenced_code_attributes). Even if it seems clunkier in some cases, it's extensible, and most third-party Markdown renderers are smart enough to ignore Pandoc's brace-delimited attributes (from [this comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/110800#issuecomment-1522044456)).
r? `@notriddle`
Allow calling these functions without `unsafe` blocks in editions up
until 2021, but don't trigger the `unused_unsafe` lint for `unsafe`
blocks containing these functions.
Fixes#27970.
Fixes#90308.
CC #124866.
