This commit adds support for linting `extern crate` statements for stability
attributes attached to the crate itself. This is likely to be the mechanism used
to deny access to experimental crates that are part of the standard
distribution.
cc #18585
Closes#18126.
At the moment this mostly only changes notes that are particularly help-oriented or directly suggest the user to do something to help messages, and does not change messages that simply explain an error message further. If it is decided that those messages should also be help messages, I can add them to this PR, but for now I’m excluding them as I believe that changing those messages might leave very few places where notes would be appropriate.
Add lint for checking exceeding bitshifts #17713
It also const-evaluates the shift width (RHS) to check more complex shifts like `1u8 << (4+5)`.
The lint-level is set to `Warn` but perhaps it must be `Deny` as in llvm exceeding bitshifts are undefined as @ben0x539 stated in #17713
As part of the collections reform RFC, this commit removes all collections
traits in favor of inherent methods on collections themselves. All methods
should continue to be available on all collections.
This is a breaking change with all of the collections traits being removed and
no longer being in the prelude. In order to update old code you should move the
trait implementations to inherent implementations directly on the type itself.
Note that some traits had default methods which will also need to be implemented
to maintain backwards compatibility.
[breaking-change]
cc #18424
This PR aims to improve the readability of diagnostic messages that involve unresolved type variables. Currently, messages like the following:
```rust
mismatched types: expected `core::result::Result<uint,()>`, found `core::option::Option<<generic #1>>`
<anon>:6 let a: Result<uint, ()> = None;
^~~~
mismatched types: expected `&mut <generic #2>`, found `uint`
<anon>:7 f(42u);
^~~
```
tend to appear unapproachable to new users. [0] While specific type var IDs are valuable in
diagnostics that deal with more than one such variable, in practice many messages
only mention one. In those cases, leaving out the specific number makes the messages
slightly less terrifying.
```rust
mismatched types: expected `core::result::Result<uint, ()>`, found `core::option::Option<_>`
<anon>:6 let a: Result<uint, ()> = None;
^~~~
mismatched types: expected `&mut _`, found `uint`
<anon>:7 f(42u);
^~~
```
As you can see, I also tweaked the aesthetics slightly by changing type variables to use the type hole syntax _. For integer variables, the syntax used is:
```rust
mismatched types: expected `core::result::Result<uint, ()>`, found `core::option::Option<_#1i>`
<anon>:6 let a: Result<uint, ()> = Some(1);
```
and float variables:
```rust
mismatched types: expected `core::result::Result<uint, ()>`, found `core::option::Option<_#1f>`
<anon>:6 let a: Result<uint, ()> = Some(0.5);
```
[0] https://twitter.com/coda/status/517713085465772032
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/2632.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/3404.
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/18426.
This is an implementation of the rustc bits of [RFC 403][rfc]. This adds a new
flag to the compiler, `-l`, as well as tweaking the `include!` macro (and
related source-centric macros).
The compiler's new `-l` flag is used to link libraries in from the command line.
This flag stacks with `#[link]` directives already found in the program. The
purpose of this flag, also stated in the RFC, is to ease linking against native
libraries which have wildly different requirements across platforms and even
within distributions of one platform. This flag accepts a string of the form
`NAME[:KIND]` where `KIND` is optional or one of dylib, static, or framework.
This is roughly equivalent to if the equivalent `#[link]` directive were just
written in the program.
The `include!` macro has been modified to recursively expand macros to allow
usage of `concat!` as an argument, for example. The use case spelled out in RFC
403 was for `env!` to be used as well to include compile-time generated files.
The macro also received a bit of tweaking to allow it to expand to either an
expression or a series of items, depending on what context it's used in.
[rfc]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/403
The error messages still aren’t as good as they were before DST, but they better
describe the actual problem, not mentioning `Sized` at all (because that bound
is normally implied, not explicitly stated).
Closes#17567.
Closes#18040.
Closes#18159.
This commit adds the following impls:
impl<T> Deref<[T]> for Vec<T>
impl<T> DerefMut<[T]> for Vec<T>
impl Deref<str> for String
This commit also removes all duplicated inherent methods from vectors and
strings as implementations will now silently call through to the slice
implementation. Some breakage occurred at std and beneath due to inherent
methods removed in favor of those in the slice traits and std doesn't use its
own prelude,
cc #18424
This common representation for delimeters should make pattern matching easier. Having a separate `token::DelimToken` enum also allows us to enforce the invariant that the opening and closing delimiters must be the same in `ast::TtDelimited`, removing the need to ensure matched delimiters when working with token trees.
This includes updating the language items and marking what needs to
change after a snapshot.
If you do not use the standard library, the language items you need to
implement have changed. For example:
```rust
#[lang = "fail_fmt"] fn fail_fmt() -> ! { loop {} }
```
is now
```rust
#[lang = "panic_fmt"] fn panic_fmt() -> ! { loop {} }
```
Related, lesser-implemented language items `fail` and
`fail_bounds_check` have become `panic` and `panic_bounds_check`, as
well. These are implemented by `libcore`, so it is unlikely (though
possible!) that these two renamings will affect you.
[breaking-change]
Fix test suite
https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/221
The current terminology of "task failure" often causes problems when
writing or speaking about code. You often want to talk about the
possibility of an operation that returns a Result "failing", but cannot
because of the ambiguity with task failure. Instead, you have to speak
of "the failing case" or "when the operation does not succeed" or other
circumlocutions.
Likewise, we use a "Failure" header in rustdoc to describe when
operations may fail the task, but it would often be helpful to separate
out a section describing the "Err-producing" case.
We have been steadily moving away from task failure and toward Result as
an error-handling mechanism, so we should optimize our terminology
accordingly: Result-producing functions should be easy to describe.
To update your code, rename any call to `fail!` to `panic!` instead.
Assuming you have not created your own macro named `panic!`, this
will work on UNIX based systems:
grep -lZR 'fail!' . | xargs -0 -l sed -i -e 's/fail!/panic!/g'
You can of course also do this by hand.
[breaking-change]
