Account for bare tuples and `Pin` methods in field searching logic
When looking for the field names and types of a given type, account for tuples. This allows suggestions for incorrectly nested field accesses and field name typos to trigger as intended. Previously these suggestions only worked on `ty::Adt`, including tuple structs which are no different to tuples, so they should behave the same in suggestions.
When suggesting field access which would encounter a method not found, do not suggest pinning when those methods are on `impl Pin` itself.
```
error[E0599]: no method named `get_ref` found for tuple `(BufReader<File>,)` in the current scope
--> $DIR/missing-field-access.rs:11:15
|
LL | let x = f.get_ref();
| ^^^^^^^ method not found in `(BufReader<File>,)`
|
help: one of the expressions' fields has a method of the same name
|
LL | let x = f.0.get_ref();
| ++
```
instead of
```
error[E0599]: no method named `get_ref` found for tuple `(BufReader<File>,)` in the current scope
--> $DIR/missing-field-access.rs:11:15
|
LL | let x = f.get_ref();
| ^^^^^^^ method not found in `(BufReader<File>,)`
|
help: consider pinning the expression
|
LL ~ let mut pinned = std::pin::pin!(f);
LL ~ let x = pinned.as_ref().get_ref();
|
```
Fixrust-lang/rust#144602.
Add support for `ty::Instance` path shortening in diagnostics
Make `ty::Instance` able to use `short_string` and usable in structured errors directly. Remove some ad-hoc type shortening logic.
`tests/ui/issues/`: The Issues Strike Back [3/N]
Some `tests/ui/issues/` housekeeping, to trim down number of tests directly under `tests/ui/issues/`. Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/133895.
r? ```@jieyouxu```
When looking for the field names and types of a given type, account for tuples. This allows suggestions for incorrectly nested field accesses and field name typos to trigger as intended. Previously these suggestions only worked on `ty::Adt`, including tuple structs which are no different to tuples, so they should behave the same in suggestions.
```
error[E0599]: no method named `get_ref` found for tuple `(BufReader<File>,)` in the current scope
--> $DIR/missing-field-access.rs:11:15
|
LL | let x = f.get_ref();
| ^^^^^^^ method not found in `(BufReader<File>,)`
|
help: one of the expressions' fields has a method of the same name
|
LL | let x = f.0.get_ref();
| ++
```
Stabilize const TypeId::of
fixesrust-lang/rust#77125
# Stabilization report for `const_type_id`
## General design
### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized?
N/A the constness was never RFCed
### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.
`const_type_id` was kept unstable because we are currently unable to stabilize the `PartialEq` impl for it (in const contexts), so we feared people would transmute the type id to an integer and compare that integer.
### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?
`TypeId::eq` is not const at this time, and will only become const once const traits are stable.
## Has a Call for Testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?
This feature has been unstable for a long time, and most people just worked around it on stable by storing a pointer to `TypeId::of` and calling that at "runtime" (usually LLVM devirtualized the function pointer and inlined the call so there was no real performance difference).
A lot of people seem to be using the `const_type_id` feature gate (600 results for the feature gate on github: https://github.com/search?q=%22%23%21%5Bfeature%28const_type_id%29%5D%22&type=code)
We have had very little feedback except desire for stabilization being expressed.
## Implementation quality
Until these three PRs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/142789
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143696
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143736
there was no difference between the const eval feature and the runtime feature except that we prevented you from using `TypeId::of` at compile-time. These three recent PRs have hardened the internals of `TypeId`:
* it now contains an array of pointers instead of integers
* these pointers at compile-time (and in miri) contain provenance that makes them unique and prevents inspection. Both miri and CTFE will in fact error if you mess with the bits or the provenance of the pointers in any way and then try to use the `TypeId` for an equality check. This also guards against creating values of type `TypeId` by any means other than `TypeId::of`
### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)
N/A see above
### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature
Since we are not stabilizing any operations on `TypeId` except for creating `TypeId`s, the test coverage of the runtime implementation of `TypeId` covers all the interesting use cases not in the list below
#### Hardening against transmutes
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id.rs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id2.rs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id3.rs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id4.rs
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_transmute_type_id5.rs
#### TypeId::eq is still unstable
* https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/ui/consts/const_cmp_type_id.rs
### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/129014 is still unresolved, but it affects more the runtime version of `TypeId` than the compile-time.
### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there?
none
### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization
* `@eddyb`
* `@RalfJung`
### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?
N/A
## Type system and execution rules
### What compilation-time checks are done that are needed to prevent undefined behavior?
Already covered above. Transmuting types with private fields to expose those fields has always been library UB, but for the specific case of `TypeId` CTFE and Miri will detect it if that is done in any way other than for reconstructing the exact same `TypeId` in another location.
### Does the feature's implementation need checks to prevent UB or is it sound by default and needs opt in in places to perform the dangerous/unsafe operations? If it is not sound by default, what is the rationale?
N/A
### Can users use this feature to introduce undefined behavior, or use this feature to break the abstraction of Rust and expose the underlying assembly-level implementation? (Describe.)
N/A
### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)
Nothing more than what needs to exist for `TypeId` already.
## Common interactions
### Does this feature introduce new expressions and can they produce temporaries? What are the lifetimes of those temporaries?
N/A
### What other unstable features may be exposed by this feature?
N/A
don't link to the nightly version of the Edition Guide in stable lints
As reported in rust-lang/rust#143557 for `rust_2024_incompatible_pat`, most future-Edition-incompatibility lints link to the nightly version of the Edition Guide; the lints were written before their respective Editions (and their guides) stabilized. But now that Rusts 2021 and 2024 are stable, these lints are emitted on stable versions of the compiler, where it makes more sense to present users with links that don't say "nightly" in them.
This does not change the link for `rust_2024_incompatible_pat`. That's handled in rust-lang/rust#144006.
Show the offset, length and memory of uninit read errors
r? ``@RalfJung``
I want to improve memory dumps in general. Not sure yet how to do so best within rust diagnostics, but in a perfect world I could generate a dummy in-memory file (that contains the rendered memory dump) that we then can then provide regular rustc `Span`s to. So we'd basically report normal diagnostics for them with squiggly lines and everything.
Split-up stability_index query
This PR aims to move deprecation and stability processing away from the monolithic `stability_index` query, and directly implement `lookup_{deprecation,stability,body_stability,const_stability}` queries.
The basic idea is to:
- move per-attribute sanity checks into `check_attr.rs`;
- move attribute compatibility checks into the `MissingStabilityAnnotations` visitor;
- progressively dismantle the `Annotator` visitor and the `stability_index` query.
The first commit contains functional change, and now warns when `#[automatically_derived]` is applied on a non-trait impl block. The other commits should not change visible behaviour.
Perf in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143845#issuecomment-3066308630 shows small but consistent improvement, except for unused-warnings case. That case being a stress test, I'm leaning towards accepting the regression.
This PR changes `check_attr`, so has a high conflict rate on that file. This should not cause issues for review.
Make slice comparisons const
This needed a fix for `derive_const`, too, as it wasn't usable in libcore anymore as trait impls need const stability attributes. I think we can't use the same system as normal trait impls while `const_trait_impl` is still unstable.
r? ```@fee1-dead```
cc rust-lang/rust#143800
type_id_eq: check that the hash fully matches the type
The previous logic wouldn't always detect when the hash mismatches the provenance. Fix that by adding a new helper, `read_type_id`, that reads a single type ID while fully checking it for validity and consistency.
r? ``@oli-obk``
trait_sel: `MetaSized` always holds temporarily
As a temporary measure while a proper fix for `tests/ui/sized-hierarchy/incomplete-inference-issue-143992.rs` is implemented, make `MetaSized` obligations always hold. In effect, temporarily reverting the `sized_hierarchy` feature. This is a small change that can be backported.
cc rust-lang/rust#143992
r? ```@lcnr```
Constify `Index` traits
tracking issue: rust-lang/rust#143775
the `SliceIndex` trait cannot be implemented by users as it is sealed. While it would be useful for the `get` method on slices, it seems weird to have a feature gate for that that isn't also gating index syntax at the same time, so I put them under the same feature gate.
r? ```````@fee1-dead```````
As a temporary measure while a proper fix for
`tests/ui/sized-hierarchy/incomplete-inference-issue-143992.rs`
is implemented, make `MetaSized` obligations always hold. In effect,
temporarily reverting the `sized_hierarchy` feature. This is a small
change that can be backported.
New tracking issues for const_ops and const_cmp
Let's do a clean start with new tracking issues to avoid mixing things up with the previous constification.
I assume the fact that the `PartialEq` *trait* and *impls* used different feature names was a mistake (the feature name on the impl is entirely irrelevant anyway).
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/143800, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/143802
r? ``@oli-obk``
Trevor Gross