Closes#2697
I guess all of the uses weren't around any more, because everything continued to compile (at least on OSX). If bors doesn't like it for another platform I can try to track it down as well.
This reverts commit 6030e3982a.
This reorders error messages in ways that aren't intended. A more satisfying solution will require an interface that allows diagnostics to be grouped together, so that messages that logically belong together aren't reordered.
#4569
Closes#3083.
This takes a similar approach to #5797 where a set is present on the `tcx` of used mutable definitions. Everything is by default warned about, and analyses must explicitly add mutable definitions to this set so they're not warned about.
Most of this was pretty straightforward, although there was one caveat that I ran into when implementing it. Apparently when the old modes are used (or maybe `legacy_modes`, I'm not sure) some different code paths are taken to cause spurious warnings to be issued which shouldn't be issued. I'm not really sure how modes even worked, so I was having a lot of trouble tracking this down. I figured that because they're a legacy thing that I'd just de-mode the compiler so that the warnings wouldn't be a problem anymore (or at least for the compiler).
Other than that, the entire compiler compiles without warnings of unused mutable variables. To prevent bad warnings, #5965 should be landed (which in turn is waiting on #5963) before landing this. I figured I'd stick it out for review anyway though.
Specifically: all enums with two variants, where one has zero size (and thus at most one inhabitant) and the other has a field where the null value would not be allowed (such as a safe pointer), are now represented by storing a null pointer in the field in question.
This is a generalization of representing `Option<~T>`, `Option<@T>`, and `Option<&T>` with nullable pointers, thus fixing Tony Hoare's “billion dollar mistake”.
```rust
use core::cell;
fn main() {
let x = cell::Cell(Some(~"foo"));
let y = x.value.get_ref().get_ref();
do x.with_mut_ref |z| { *z = None; }
println(*y) // boom!
}
```
use core::cell;
fn main() {
let x = cell::Cell(Some(~"foo"));
let y = x.value.get_ref().get_ref();
do x.with_mut_ref |z| { *z = None; }
println(*y) // boom!
}
This renaming, proposed in the [Numeric Bikeshed](https://github.com/mozilla/rust/wiki/Bikeshed-Numeric-Traits#rename-modulo-into-rem-or-remainder-in-traits-and-docs), will allow us to implement div and and modulo methods that follow the conventional mathematical definitions for negative numbers without altering the definitions of the operators (and confusing systems programmers). Here is a useful answer on StackOverflow that explains the difference between `div`/`mod` and `quot`/`rem` in Haskell: (When is the difference between quotRem and divMod useful?)[http://stackoverflow.com/a/339823/679485].
This is part of the numeric trait reforms tracked in issue #4819.
