type is too big -> values of the type are too big
strictly speaking, `[u8; usize::MAX]` or even `[[[u128; usize::MAX]; usize::MAX]; usize::MAX]` are absolutely fine types as long as you don't try to deal with any values of it.
This error message seems to cause some confusion imo, for example in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79135#issuecomment-729361380 so I would prefer us to be more precise here.
See the added test case which uses one of these types without causing an error.
r? ``@oli-obk``
Introduce `TypeVisitor::BreakTy`
Implements MCP rust-lang/compiler-team#383.
r? `@ghost`
cc `@lcnr` `@oli-obk`
~~Blocked on FCP in rust-lang/compiler-team#383.~~
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`
look at assoc ct, check the type of nodes
an example where types matter are function objects, see the added test which previously passed.
Now does a shallow comparison of unevaluated constants.
r? ```@oli-obk```
The discussion seems to have resolved that this lint is a bit "noisy" in
that applying it in all places would result in a reduction in
readability.
A few of the trivial functions (like `Path::new`) are fine to leave
outside of closures.
The general rule seems to be that anything that is obviously an
allocation (`Box`, `Vec`, `vec![]`) should be in a closure, even if it
is a 0-sized allocation.
revert #75443, update mir validator
This PR reverts rust-lang#75443 to fix rust-lang#75992 and instead uses rust-lang#75419 to fix rust-lang#75313.
Adapts rust-lang#75419 to correctly deal with unevaluated constants as otherwise some `feature(const_evaluatable_checked)` tests would ICE.
Note that rust-lang#72793 was also fixed by rust-lang#75443, but as that issue only concerns `feature(type_alias_impl_trait)` I deleted that test case for now and would reopen that issue.
rust-lang#75443 may have also allowed some other code to now successfully compile which would make this revert a breaking change after 2 stable versions, but I hope that this is a purely theoretical concern.
See https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/182449-t-compiler.2Fhelp/topic/generator.20upvars/near/214617274 for more reasoning about this.
r? `@nikomatsakis` `@eddyb` `@RalfJung`
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`.
check object safety of generic constants
As `Self` can only be effectively used in constants with `const_evaluatable_checked` this should not matter outside of it.
Implements the first item of #72219
> Object safety interactions with constants
r? @oli-obk for now cc @nikomatsakis
Tweak match arm semicolon removal suggestion to account for futures
* Tweak and extend "use `.await`" suggestions
* Suggest removal of semicolon on prior match arm
* Account for `impl Future` when suggesting semicolon removal
* Silence some errors when encountering `await foo()?` as can't be certain what the intent was
*Thanks to https://twitter.com/a_hoverbear/status/1318960787105353728 for pointing this out!*
