Fixup missing renames from `#[main]` to `#[rustc_main]`
In #84217 `#[main]` was removed and replaced with `#[rustc_main]`. In some places the rename was forgotten, which makes the current code confusing, because at first glance it seems that `#[main]` is still around. Perform the renames also in these places.
I noticed this (after first being confused by it) when working on #97802.
r? `@petrochenkov`
(since you reviewed the other PR)
Improve suggestion for calling fn-like expr on type mismatch
1.) Suggest calling values of with RPIT types (and probably TAIT) when we expect `Ty` and have `impl Fn() -> Ty`
2.) Suggest calling closures even when they're not assigned to a local variable first
3.) Drive-by fix of a pretty-printing bug (`impl Fn()-> Ty` => `impl Fn() -> Ty`)
r? ```@estebank```
rustc_target: Remove some redundant target properties
`is_like_emscripten` is equivalent to `os == "emscripten"`, so it's removed.
`is_like_fuchsia` is equivalent to `os == "fuchsia"`, so it's removed.
`is_like_osx` also falls into the same category and is equivalent to `vendor == "apple"`, but it's commonly used so I kept it as is for now.
`is_like_(solaris,windows,wasm)` are combinations of different operating systems or architectures (see compiler/rustc_target/src/spec/tests/tests_impl.rs) so they are also kept as is.
I think `is_like_wasm` (and maybe `is_like_osx`) are sufficiently closed sets, so we can remove these fields as well and replace them with methods like `fn is_like_wasm() { arch == "wasm32" || arch == "wasm64" }`.
On other hand, `is_like_solaris` and `is_like_windows` are sufficiently open and I can imagine custom targets introducing other values for `os`.
This is kind of a gray area.
Remove (transitive) reliance on sorting by DefId in pretty-printer
This moves us a step closer to removing the `PartialOrd/`Ord` impls
for `DefId`. See #90317
Add macro support in jump to definition feature
Fixes#91174.
To do so, I check if the span comes from an expansion, and if so, I infer the original macro `DefId` or `Span` depending if it's a defined in the current crate or not.
There is one limitation due to macro expansion though:
```rust
macro_rules! yolo { () => {}}
fn foo() {
yolo!();
}
```
In `foo`, `yolo!` won't be linked because after expansion, it is replaced by nothing (which seems logical). So I can't get an item from the `Visitor` from which I could tell if its `Span` comes from an expansion.
I added a test for this specific limitation alongside others.
Demo: https://rustdoc.crud.net/imperio/macro-jump-to-def/src/foo/check-source-code-urls-to-def-std.rs.html
As for the empty macro issue that cannot create a jump to definition, you can see it [here](https://rustdoc.crud.net/imperio/macro-jump-to-def/src/foo/check-source-code-urls-to-def-std.rs.html#35).
r? ```@jyn514```
fix universes in the NLL type tests
In the NLL code, we were not accommodating universes in the
`type_test` logic.
Fixes#98095.
r? `@compiler-errors`
This breaks some tests, however, so the purpose of this branch is more explanatory and perhaps to do a crater run.
implement `iter_projections` function on `PlaceRef`
this makes the api more flexible. the original function now calls the PlaceRef
version to avoid duplicating the code.
Update no_default_libraries handling for emscripten target
```@sbc100``` says:
> `-sDEFAULT_LIBRARY_FUNCS_TO_INCLUDE=[]` is almost certainly wrong/out-of-date. This setting defaults to the empty list anyway these days so its redundant. Also we now support `-nodefaultlibs` so you can use that, as with other toolchains.
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/98303#issuecomment-1162163684
Migrate two diagnostics from the `rustc_builtin_macros` crate
Migrate two diagnostics to use the struct derive and be translatable.
r? ```@davidtwco```
Provide a `PathSegment.res` in more cases
I find that in many cases, the `res` associated with a `PathSegment` is `Res::Err` even though the path was fully resolved. A few diagnostics use this `res` and their error messages suffer because of the lack of resolved segment.
This fixes it a bit, but it's obviously not complete and I'm not exactly sure if it's correct.
Greatly improve error reporting for futures and generators in `note_obligation_cause_code`
Most futures don't go through this code path, because they're caught by
`maybe_note_obligation_cause_for_async_await`. But all generators do,
and `maybe_note` is imperfect and doesn't catch all futures. Improve the error message for those it misses.
At some point, we may want to consider unifying this with the code for `maybe_note_async_await`,
so that `async_await` notes all parent constraints, and `note_obligation` can point to yield points.
But both functions are quite complicated, and it's not clear to me how to combine them;
this seems like a good incremental improvement.
Helps with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97332.
r? ``@estebank`` cc ``@eholk`` ``@compiler-errors``
In fc357039f9 `#[main]` was removed and replaced with `#[rustc_main]`.
In some place the rename was forgotten, which makes the current code
confusing, because at first glance it seems that `#[main]` is still
around. Perform the renames also in these places.
Create elided lifetime parameters for function-like types
Split from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97720
This PR refactor lifetime generic parameters in bare function types and parenthesized traits to introduce the additional required lifetimes as fresh parameters in a `for<>` bound.
This PR does the same to lifetimes appearing in closure signatures, and as-if introducing `for<>` bounds on closures (without the associated change in semantics).
r? `@petrochenkov`
Point at return expression for RPIT-related error
Certainly this needs some diagnostic refining, but I wanted to show that it was possible first and foremost. Not sure if this is the right approach. Open to feedback.
Fixes#80583
This comment is out dated and misleading, the arm is about TAITs
r? ```@oli-obk```
```@oli-obk``` unsure if you want to add a different comment of some sort.
```@bors``` rollup=always
Remove the unused-`#[doc(hidden)]` logic from the `unused_attributes` lint
Fixes#96890.
It was found out that `#[doc(hidden)]` on trait impl items does indeed have an effect on the generated documentation (see the linked issue). In my opinion and the one of [others](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/266220-rustdoc/topic/Validy.20checks.20for.20.60.23.5Bdoc.28hidden.29.5D.60/near/281846219), rustdoc's output is actually a bit flawed in that regard but that should be tracked in a new issue I suppose (I will open an issue for that in the near future).
The check was introduced in #96008 which is marked to be part of version `1.62` (current `beta`). As far as I understand, this means that **this PR needs to be backported** to `beta` to fix#96890 on time. Correct me if I am wrong.
CC `@dtolnay` (in case you would like to agree or disagree with my decision to fully remove this check)
`@rustbot` label A-lint T-compiler T-rustdoc
r? `@rust-lang/compiler`
lub: don't bail out due to empty binders
allows for the following to compile. The equivalent code using `struct Wrapper<'upper>(fn(&'upper ());` already compiles on stable.
```rust
let _: fn(&'upper ()) = match v {
true => lt_in_fn::<'a>(),
false => lt_in_fn::<'b>(),
};
```
see https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=7034a677190110941223cafac6632f70 for a complete example
r? ```@rust-lang/types```
