2229: Fix issues with move closures and mutability
This PR fixes two issues when feature `capture_disjoint_fields` is used.
1. Can't mutate using a mutable reference
2. Move closures try to move value out through a reference.
To do so, we
1. Compute the mutability of the capture and store it as part of the `CapturedPlace` that is written in TypeckResults
2. Restrict capture precision. Note this is temporary for now, to allow the feature to be used with move closures and ByValue captures and might change depending on discussions with the lang team.
- No Derefs are captured for ByValue captures, since that will result in value behind a reference getting moved.
- No projections are applied to raw pointers since these require unsafe blocks. We capture
them completely.
r? `````@nikomatsakis`````
Edit rustc_typeck top-level docs
Edit punctuation and wording in note on type variables vs. type parameters.
Also add missing punctuation and two inter-doc links.
Stabilize by-value `[T; N]` iterator `core::array::IntoIter`
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65798
This is unblocked now that `min_const_generics` has been stabilized in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/79135.
This PR does *not* include the corresponding `IntoIterator` impl, which is https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/65819. Instead, an iterator can be constructed through the `new` method.
`new` would become unnecessary when `IntoIterator` is implemented and might be deprecated then, although it will stay stable.
When `capture_disjoint_fields` is not enabled, checking if the root variable
binding is mutable would suffice.
However with the feature enabled, the captured place might be mutable
because it dereferences a mutable reference.
This PR computes the mutability of each capture after capture analysis
in rustc_typeck. We store this in `ty::CapturedPlace` and then use
`ty::CapturedPlace::mutability` in mir_build and borrow_check.
- No Derefs in move closure, this will result in value behind a reference getting moved.
- No projections are applied to raw pointers, since these require unsafe blocks. We capture
them completely.
Motivations for these are recorded here: https://hackmd.io/71qq-IOpTNqzMkPpAI1dVg?view
Avoid describing a method as 'not found' when bounds are unsatisfied
Fixes#76267
When there is a single applicable method candidate, but its trait bounds
are not satisfied, we avoid saying that the method is "not found".
Insted, we update the error message to directly mention which bounds are
not satisfied, rather than mentioning them in a note.
Tweak suggestion for missing field in patterns
Account for parser recovered struct and tuple patterns to avoid invalid
suggestion.
Follow up to #81103.
Refractor a few more types to `rustc_type_ir`
In the continuation of #79169, ~~blocked on that PR~~.
This PR:
- moves `IntVarValue`, `FloatVarValue`, `InferTy` (and friends) and `Variance`
- creates the `IntTy`, `UintTy` and `FloatTy` enums in `rustc_type_ir`, based on their `ast` and `chalk_ir` equilavents, and uses them for types in the rest of the compiler.
~~I will split up that commit to make this easier to review and to have a better commit history.~~
EDIT: done, I split the PR in commits of 200-ish lines each
r? `````@nikomatsakis````` cc `````@jackh726`````
Fixes#76267
When there is a single applicable method candidate, but its trait bounds
are not satisfied, we avoid saying that the method is "not found".
Insted, we update the error message to directly mention which bounds are
not satisfied, rather than mentioning them in a note.
Small refactor in typeck
- `check_impl_items_against_trait` only queries and walks through associated items once
- extracted function that reports errors
- don't check specialization validity when trait item does not match
- small additional cleanups
Gracefully handle loop labels missing leading `'` in different positions
Fix#81192.
* Account for labels when suggesting `loop` instead of `while true`
* Suggest `'a` when given `a` only when appropriate
* Add loop head span to hir
* Tweak error for invalid `break expr`
* Add more misspelled label tests
* Avoid emitting redundant "unused label" lint
* Parse loop labels missing a leading `'`
Each commit can be reviewed in isolation.
don't suggest erroneous trailing comma after `..`
In #76612, suggestions were added for missing fields in patterns. However, the suggestions are being inserted just at the end
of the last field in the pattern—before any trailing comma after the last field. This resulted in the "if you don't care about missing fields" suggestion to recommend code with a trailing comma after the field ellipsis (`..,`), which is actually not legal ("`..` must be at the end and cannot have a trailing comma")!
Incidentally, the doc-comment on `error_unmentioned_fields` was using `you_cant_use_this_field` as an example field name (presumably copy-paste inherited from the description of Issue #76077), but the present author found this confusing, because unmentioned fields aren't necessarily unusable.
The suggested code in the diff this commit introduces to `destructuring-assignment/struct_destructure_fail.stderr` doesn't work, but it didn't work beforehand, either (because of the "found reserved identifier `_`" thing), so you can't really call it a regression; it could be fixed in a separate PR.
Resolves#78511.
r? `@davidtwco` or `@estebank`
Improve diagnostics when closure doesn't meet trait bound
Improves the diagnostics when closure doesn't meet trait bound by modifying `TypeckResuts::closure_kind_origins` such that `hir::Place` is used instead of `Symbol`. Using `hir::Place` to describe which capture influenced the decision of selecting a trait a closure satisfies to (Fn/FnMut/FnOnce, Copy) allows us to show precise path in the diagnostics when `capture_disjoint_field` feature is enabled.
Closes rust-lang/project-rfc-2229/issues/21
r? ```@nikomatsakis```
In #76612, suggestions were added for missing fields in
patterns. However, the suggestions are being inserted just at the end
of the last field in the pattern—before any trailing comma after the
last field. This resulted in the "if you don't care about missing
fields" suggestion to recommend code with a trailing comma after the
field ellipsis (`..,`), which is actually not legal ("`..` must be at
the end and cannot have a trailing comma")!
Incidentally, the doc-comment on `error_unmentioned_fields` was using
`you_cant_use_this_field` as an example field name (presumably
copy-paste inherited from the description of Issue #76077), but
the present author found this confusing, because unmentioned fields
aren't necessarily unusable.
The suggested code in the diff this commit introduces to
`destructuring-assignment/struct_destructure_fail.stderr` doesn't
work, but it didn't work beforehand, either (because of the "found
reserved identifier `_`" thing), so you can't really call it a
regression; it could be fixed in a separate PR.
Resolves#78511.
implement ptr::write without dedicated intrinsic
This makes `ptr::write` more consistent with `ptr::write_unaligned`, `ptr::read`, `ptr::read_unaligned`, all of which are implemented in terms of `copy_nonoverlapping`.
This means we can also remove `move_val_init` implementations in codegen and Miri, and its special handling in the borrow checker.
Also see [this Zulip discussion](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/ptr.3A.3Aread.20vs.20ptr.3A.3Awrite).
