move many tests from `structs-enums` to `structs` or `enum`
This PR moves most of the tests in `ui/structs-enums` that are only about structs or only about enums to their respective directory, as a step towards removing `ui/structs-enums`.
Followup to rust-lang/rust#154131.
r? @Kivooeo
Fix ice in rustdoc of private reexport
Fixesrust-lang/rust#154383
The root cause is rustdoc could still try to resolve links for source docs that resolver did not cache in `ResolveDocLinks::Exported` mode. The test case will not crash with `--document-private-items` option, which will use `ResolveDocLinks::All`.
The fix makes rustdoc skip link resolution based on the source `DefId` of each doc fragment, so its behavior stays aligned with resolver's logic here: https://github.com/chenyukang/rust/blob/dc5cb1719eed6ac9275fe93d914d32141606b2ac/compiler/rustc_resolve/src/late.rs#L685
simd_fmin/fmax: make semantics and name consistent with scalar intrinsics
This is the SIMD version of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/153343: change the documented semantics of the SIMD float min/max intrinsics to that of the scalar intrinsics, and also make the name consistent. The overall semantic change this amounts to is that we restrict the non-determinism: the old semantics effectively mean "when one input is an SNaN, the result non-deterministically is a NaN or the other input"; the new semantics say that in this case the other input must be returned. For all other cases, old and new semantics are equivalent. This means all users of these intrinsics that were correct with the old semantics are still correct: the overall set of possible behaviors has become smaller, no new possible behaviors are being added.
In terms of providers of this API:
- Miri, GCC, and cranelift already implement the new semantics, so no changes are needed.
- LLVM is adjusted to use `minimumnum nsz` instead of `minnum`, thus giving us the new semantics.
In terms of consumers of this API:
- Portable SIMD almost certainly wants to match the scalar behavior, so this is strictly a bugfix here.
- Stdarch mostly stopped using the intrinsic, except on nvptx, where arguably the new semantics are closer to what we actually want than the old semantics (https://github.com/rust-lang/stdarch/issues/2056).
Q: Should there be an `f` in the intrinsic name to indicate that it is for floats? E.g., `simd_fminimum_number_nsz`?
Also see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/153395.
Merge `fabsf16/32/64/128` into `fabs::<F>`
Following [a small conversation on Zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/Float.20intrinsics/with/521501401) (and because I'd be interested in starting to contribute on Rust), I thought I'd give a try at merging the float intrinsics :)
This PR just merges `fabsf16`, `fabsf32`, `fabsf64`, `fabsf128`, as it felt like an easy first target.
Notes:
- I'm opening the PR for one intrinsic as it's probably easier if the shift is done one intrinsic at a time, but let me know if you'd rather I do several at a time to reduce the number of PRs.
- Currently this PR increases LOCs, despite being an attempt at simplifying the intrinsics/compilers. I believe this increase is a one time thing as I had to define new functions and move some things around, and hopefully future PRs/commits will reduce overall LoCs
- `fabsf32` and `fabsf64` are `#[rustc_intrinsic_const_stable_indirect]`, while `fabsf16` and `fabsf128` aren't; because `f32`/`f64` expect the function to be const, the generic version must be made indirectly stable too. We'd need to check with T-lang this change is ok; the only other intrinsics where there is such a mismatch is `minnum`, `maxnum` and `copysign`.
- I haven't touched libm because I'm not familiar with how it works; any guidance would be welcome!
stabilizes `core::range::RangeFrom`
stabilizes `core::range::RangeFromIter`
add examples for `remainder` method on range iterators
`RangeFromIter::remainder` was not stabilized (see issue 154458)
Rollup of 11 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#152880 (Tweak incorrect assoc item note)
- rust-lang/rust#153526 (Fix LegacyKeyValueFormat report from docker build: i686)
- rust-lang/rust#153613 (interpreter error reporting: remove arguments that are always the same)
- rust-lang/rust#154029 (Replace `truncate(0)` with `clear()`)
- rust-lang/rust#154125 (Inline and remove `DepGraphData::try_mark_parent_green`.)
- rust-lang/rust#154185 (Prevent no_threads RwLock's write() impl from setting mode to -1 when it is locked for reading)
- rust-lang/rust#154394 (Normalize rustc path prefix when testing `-Z track-diagnostics`)
- rust-lang/rust#154450 (Use the normal arg-parsing machinery for `-Zassert-incr-state`)
- rust-lang/rust#154475 (Emit a pre-expansion feature gate warning for `box`'ed struct field patterns)
- rust-lang/rust#154500 (EnumSizeOpt: use Allocation::write_scalar instead of manual endianess logic)
- rust-lang/rust#154502 (interpret: ensure that untupled arguments are actually tuples)
EnumSizeOpt: use Allocation::write_scalar instead of manual endianess logic
The first commits makes the test actually show the bytes of the newly generated allocation, so we'd notice if something goes wrong.
The 2nd commit replaces manual endianess handling with use of proper `Allocation` methods.
r? @oli-obk
Emit a pre-expansion feature gate warning for `box`'ed struct field patterns
While the following code triggers a feature gate *warning*:
```rs
fn f() {
#[cfg(false)]
let box x; //~ WARN box pattern syntax is experimental
}
```
the code below does not (on stable & main):
```rs
fn f() {
#[cfg(false)]
let Struct { box x };
}
```
This is an oversight as both are part of the unstable feature `box_patterns` (that isn't properly gated pre expansion for historical reasons). Of course, both forms lead to a feature gate error *post expansion*.
This is a bug fix and doesn't need any input from T-compiler or T-lang. For context, emitting warnings in these cases is legitimized by [MCP 535](https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/535)[^1].
Part of rust-lang/rust#154045.
[^1]: In case you're wondering why the MCP talks about a *lint* even though the feature gate warnings as seen today don't reference any lint by name, read https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/154045#issuecomment-4144034419.
Add test for issue #101532: dead code warnings in const _
Closesrust-lang/rust#101532
Adds a test for dead code warnings in `const _`.
This was already fixed, just adding coverage to avoid regressions.
Avoid ICE in explicit reference cast suggestion for unrelated leaf pr…
Fixesrust-lang/rust#154403
The explicit reference cast suggestion in was enabled based on `main_trait_predicate` being `From`/`TryFrom`, but it then extracted the source type from `leaf_trait_predicate`.
That is only valid when the leaf obligation is also part of the `From`/`TryFrom` conversion family.
Improve doc comment unicode guidance
Fixesrust-lang/rust#153096
This PR does not suggest HTML bidi markup, because doc comments are still Rust source first, not only rendered rustdoc output. HTML only helps in the rendered documentation rather than making them explicit in source.
move many tests out of `ui/unsafe`
`ui/unsafe` is a pretty big and generic directory. This PR moves some tests from it to `ui/union` and some others to a new `rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range` directory.
r? @Kivooeo
Remove divergence check from check_expr_array
Fixesrust-lang/rust#153695.
`check_expr_array` currently assumes it should only be entered with` self.diverges == Diverges::Maybe`, but that assumption does not appear to hold in all valid cases. A never-pattern parameter can seed a function or closure body with inherited `Diverges::Always`, and exprs in that body are still typecked.
Pass -pg to linker when using -Zinstrument-mcount
This selects a slightly different crt on gnu targets which enables the profiler within glibc.
This makes using gprof a little easier with Rust binaries. Otherwise, rustc must be passed `-Clink-args=-pg` to ensure the correct startup code is linked.
Make `rustc_hir_analysis` not depend on `rustc_lint`.
`rustc_hir_analysis` depends on `rustc_lint` in just a single function: `emit_delayed_lint`, which is used by the
"emit_ast_lowering_delayed_lints" checking section within `rustc_hir_analysis::check_crate`.
This commit moves that function and section to out of `rustc_hir_analysis::check_crate`, into `rustc_interface`, eliminating the dependency. This seems reasonable because the delayed lint errors aren't really related to HIR analysis, they were in there just because HIR analysis is what follows AST lowering.
This means `rustc_hir_analysis` and `rustc_lint` can both start compiling as soon as `rustc_trait_selection` finishes. This also changes the error order in one test, which doesn't matter.
The commit also changes `emit_delayed_lint` to `emit_delayed_lints`, factoring out some code duplicated in rustdoc.
r? @davidtwco
Reorder inline asm operands in pretty printer to satisfy grammar constraints
After macro expansion, named `asm!` operands are converted to positional operands and the template string uses numeric indices. However, the pretty printer previously emitted operands in their original AST order, which could place positional (formerly named) register-class operands after explicit register operands. This violates the `asm!` grammar rule that positional arguments cannot follow explicit register arguments, causing the expanded output from `rustc -Zunpretty=expanded` to fail to reparse.
When reordering is needed, the fix partitions operands into non-explicit and explicit register groups, emits non-explicit operands first, then explicit register operands, and remaps template placeholder indices (`{N}`) to match the new positions. When operands are already correctly ordered, the original code path is used unchanged.
## Example
**before** (`rustc 1.96.0-nightly (3b1b0ef4d 2026-03-11)`):
```rust
#![feature(prelude_import)]
#![no_std]
extern crate std;
#[prelude_import]
use ::std::prelude::rust_2015::*;
//@ pretty-mode:expanded
//@ pp-exact:asm-operand-order.pp
//@ only-x86_64
use std::arch::asm;
pub fn main() {
unsafe {
asm!("{1}", out("rax") _, in(reg) 4);
asm!("{1}", out("rax") _, in(reg) 4, options(nostack));
asm!("{1} {2}", out("rax") _, in(reg) 4, in(reg) 5);
}
}
```
**after** (this branch):
```rust
#![feature(prelude_import)]
#![no_std]
extern crate std;
#[prelude_import]
use ::std::prelude::rust_2015::*;
//@ pretty-mode:expanded
//@ pp-exact:asm-operand-order.pp
//@ only-x86_64
use std::arch::asm;
pub fn main() {
unsafe {
asm!("{0}", in(reg) 4, out("rax") _);
asm!("{0}", in(reg) 4, out("rax") _, options(nostack));
asm!("{0} {1}", in(reg) 4, in(reg) 5, out("rax") _);
}
}
```
Notice the operand reordering: in the before, explicit register operands (`out("rax")`) appear before positional operands (`in(reg)`), violating the grammar (E0662). The template references are also wrong (`{1}` instead of `{0}`). The after moves positional operands first and renumbers the template references accordingly.
Add x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu{m,t}san target which enables {M,T}San by default
Analogous to the ASan target (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/149644), this adds targets for MSan and TSan.
As suggested, in order to distribute sanitizer instrumented standard libraries without introducing new rustc flags, this adds a new dedicated target. With the target, we can distribute the instrumented standard libraries through a separate rustup component.
> A tier 2 target must have value to people other than its maintainers. (It may still be a niche target, but it must not be exclusively useful for an inherently closed group.)
The target is useful to anyone who wants to use MSan/TSan with a stable compiler or the ease to not have to recompiled all standard libraries for full coverage.
> A tier 2 target must have a designated team of developers (the “target maintainers”) available to consult on target-specific build-breaking issues, or if necessary to develop target-specific language or library implementation details. This team must have at least 2 developers.
> * The target maintainers should not only fix target-specific issues, but should use any such issue as an opportunity to educate the Rust community about portability to their target, and enhance documentation of the target.
I pledge myself and the folks from the Exploit Mitigations Project Group (rcvalle@ & 1c3t3a@) as target maintainers to fix target-specific issues and educate the Rust community about their use.
> The target must not place undue burden on Rust developers not specifically concerned with that target. Rust developers are expected to not gratuitously break a tier 2 target, but are not expected to become experts in every tier 2 target, and are not expected to provide target-specific implementations for every tier 2 target.
Understood. The target should not have negative impact for anyone not using it.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target using cross-compilation, and explaining how to run tests for the target. If at all possible, this documentation should show how to run Rust programs and tests for the target using emulation, to allow anyone to do so. If the target cannot be feasibly emulated, the documentation should explain how to obtain and work with physical hardware, cloud systems, or equivalent.
`src/doc/rustc/src/platform-support/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu{m,t}san.md` should provide the necessary documentation on how to build the target or compile programs with it. In the way the target can be emulated it should not differ from the tier 1 target `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu`.
> The target must document its baseline expectations for the features or versions of CPUs, operating systems, libraries, runtime environments, and similar.
The baseline expectation mirror `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu`.
> If introducing a new tier 2 or higher target that is identical to an existing Rust target except for the baseline expectations for the features or versions of CPUs, operating systems, libraries, runtime environments, and similar, then the proposed target must document to the satisfaction of the approving teams why the specific difference in baseline expectations provides sufficient value to justify a separate target.
> * Note that in some cases, based on the usage of existing targets within the Rust community, Rust developers or a target’s maintainers may wish to modify the baseline expectations of a target, or split an existing target into multiple targets with different baseline expectations. A proposal to do so will be treated similarly to the analogous promotion, demotion, or removal of a target, according to this policy, with the same team approvals required.
> * For instance, if an OS version has become obsolete and unsupported, a target for that OS may raise its baseline expectations for OS version (treated as though removing a target corresponding to the older versions), or a target for that OS may split out support for older OS versions into a lower-tier target (treated as though demoting a target corresponding to the older versions, and requiring justification for a new target at a lower tier for the older OS versions).
This has been outlined sufficiently. We should not enable MSan/TSan in the default target and are therefore creating a new tier 2 target to bridge the gap until `build-std` stabilized.
> Tier 2 targets must not leave any significant portions of core or the standard library unimplemented or stubbed out, unless they cannot possibly be supported on the target.
> * The right approach to handling a missing feature from a target may depend on whether the target seems likely to develop the feature in the future. In some cases, a target may be co-developed along with Rust support, and Rust may gain new features on the target as that target gains the capabilities to support those features.
> * As an exception, a target identical to an existing tier 1 target except for lower baseline expectations for the OS, CPU, or similar, may propose to qualify as tier 2 (but not higher) without support for std if the target will primarily be used in no_std applications, to reduce the support burden for the standard library. In this case, evaluation of the proposed target’s value will take this limitation into account.
All of std that is supported by `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` is also supported.
> The code generation backend for the target should not have deficiencies that invalidate Rust safety properties, as evaluated by the Rust compiler team. (This requirement does not apply to arbitrary security enhancements or mitigations provided by code generation backends, only to those properties needed to ensure safe Rust code cannot cause undefined behavior or other unsoundness.) If this requirement does not hold, the target must clearly and prominently document any such limitations as part of the target’s entry in the target tier list, and ideally also via a failing test in the testsuite. The Rust compiler team must be satisfied with the balance between these limitations and the difficulty of implementing the necessary features.
> * For example, if Rust relies on a specific code generation feature to ensure that safe code cannot overflow the stack, the code generation for the target should support that feature.
> * If the Rust compiler introduces new safety properties (such as via new capabilities of a compiler backend), the Rust compiler team will determine if they consider those new safety properties a best-effort improvement for specific targets, or a required property for all Rust targets. In the latter case, the compiler team may require the maintainers of existing targets to either implement and confirm support for the property or update the target tier list with documentation of the missing property.
The entire point is to have more security instead of less ;) The safety properties provided are already present in the compiler, just not enabled by default.
> If the target supports C code, and the target has an interoperable calling convention for C code, the Rust target must support that C calling convention for the platform via extern "C". The C calling convention does not need to be the default Rust calling convention for the target, however.
Understood.
> The target must build reliably in CI, for all components that Rust’s CI considers mandatory.
Understood and the reason for introducing the tier 2 target.
> The approving teams may additionally require that a subset of tests pass in CI, such as enough to build a functional “hello world” program, ./x.py test --no-run, or equivalent “smoke tests”. In particular, this requirement may apply if the target builds host tools, or if the tests in question provide substantial value via early detection of critical problems.
Understood.
> Building the target in CI must not take substantially longer than the current slowest target in CI, and should not substantially raise the maintenance burden of the CI infrastructure. This requirement is subjective, to be evaluated by the infrastructure team, and will take the community importance of the target into account.
Understood.
> Tier 2 targets should, if at all possible, support cross-compiling. Tier 2 targets should not require using the target as the host for builds, even if the target supports host tools.
Understood. No need to use this target as the host (no benefit of having MSan/TSan enabled for compiling).
> In addition to the legal requirements for all targets (specified in the tier 3 requirements), because a tier 2 target typically involves the Rust project building and supplying various compiled binaries, incorporating the target and redistributing any resulting compiled binaries (e.g. built libraries, host tools if any) must not impose any onerous license requirements on any members of the Rust project, including infrastructure team members and those operating CI systems. This is a subjective requirement, to be evaluated by the approving teams.
> * As an exception to this, if the target’s primary purpose is to build components for a Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) project licensed under “copyleft” terms (terms which require licensing other code under compatible FOSS terms), such as kernel modules or plugins, then the standard libraries for the target may potentially be subject to copyleft terms, as long as such terms are satisfied by Rust’s existing practices of providing full corresponding source code. Note that anything added to the Rust repository itself must still use Rust’s standard license terms.
Understood, no legal differences between this target and `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu`.
> Tier 2 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to ensure that tests pass for the target. In particular, do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on the PR based on tests failing for the target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via @) to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding the PR breaking tests on a tier 2 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
> * Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications.
Understood.
> The target maintainers should regularly run the testsuite for the target, and should fix any test failures in a reasonably timely fashion.
Understood.
> All requirements for tier 3 apply.
Requirements for tier 3 are listed below.
> A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target. (The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
I pledge to do my best maintaining it and we can also include the folks from the Exploit Mitigations Project Group (rcvalle@ & 1c3t3a@).
> Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust (such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important even for a tier 3 target.
We've chosen `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu{m,t}san` as the name which was suggested on [#t-compiler/major changes > Create new Tier 2 targets with sanitizers… compiler-team#951 @ 💬](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/233931-t-compiler.2Fmajor-changes/topic/Create.20new.20Tier.202.20targets.20with.20sanitizers.E2.80.A6.20compiler-team.23951/near/564482315). We've merged `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnuasan` and are now following up with the MSan and TSan targets
> Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to disambiguate it.
There should be no confusion, it's clear that it's the original target with MSan/TSan enabled.
> If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name. Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
Only letters, numbers and dashes used.
> Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for Rust developers or users.
There are no unusual requirements to build or use it. It's the original `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` target with MSan/TSan enabled as a default sanitizer.
> The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
There are no license implications.
> Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
Given, by reusing the existing MSan/TSan code.
> The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be subject to any new license requirements.
There are no new dependencies/features required.
> Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries. Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require such libraries at all. For instance, rustc built for the target may depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library, but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
It's using open source tools only.
> "onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous" legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements (CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms, requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its developers or users.
There are no such terms present.
> Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise participate in discussions.
Understood.
> This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
Understood.
> Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3 target not implementing those portions.
The goal is to have MSan/TSan instrumented standard library variants of the existing `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu` target, so all should be present.
> The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target, using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
I think the explanation in platform support doc is enough to make this aspect clear.
> Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular, do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or notifications (via any medium, including via @) to a PR author or others involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into such messages.
Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested such notifications.
Understood.
> Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2 or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3 target.
Understood.
> In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets, such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
I don't believe this PR is affected by this.
> Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target. (Having support in a fork of the backend is not sufficient, it must be upstream.)
The target should work on all rustc versions that correctly compile for `x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu`.
Rollup of 2 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#154229 (Ensure `ErasedData` only implements appropriate auto traits)
- rust-lang/rust#154409 (Update `try_blocks` to a new tracking issue number)
Suggest using equality comparison instead of pattern matching on non-structural constant in pattern
When encountering a pattern containing a non-structural constant (not marked as `#[derive(PartialEq)]` to make it suitable for pattern matching, `C` in the examples below), we would previously not provide additional guidance. With this PR, the `help` in the following examples are added:
```
error: constant of non-structural type `partial_eq::S` in a pattern
--> $DIR/suggest_equality_comparison_instead_of_pattern_matching.rs:16:18
|
LL | struct S;
| -------- `partial_eq::S` must be annotated with `#[derive(PartialEq)]` to be usable in patterns
...
LL | const C: S = S;
| ---------- constant defined here
...
LL | Some(C) => {}
| ^ constant of non-structural type
|
note: the `PartialEq` trait must be derived, manual `impl`s are not sufficient; see https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/marker/trait.StructuralPartialEq.html for details
--> $DIR/suggest_equality_comparison_instead_of_pattern_matching.rs:5:5
|
LL | impl PartialEq<S> for S {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
help: add a condition to the match arm checking for equality
|
LL - Some(C) => {}
LL + Some(binding) if binding == C => {}
|
```
```
error: constant of non-structural type `partial_eq::S` in a pattern
--> $DIR/suggest_equality_comparison_instead_of_pattern_matching.rs:22:18
|
LL | struct S;
| -------- `partial_eq::S` must be annotated with `#[derive(PartialEq)]` to be usable in patterns
...
LL | const C: S = S;
| ---------- constant defined here
...
LL | let Some(C) = Some(S) else { return; };
| ^ constant of non-structural type
|
note: the `PartialEq` trait must be derived, manual `impl`s are not sufficient; see https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/marker/trait.StructuralPartialEq.html for details
--> $DIR/suggest_equality_comparison_instead_of_pattern_matching.rs:5:5
|
LL | impl PartialEq<S> for S {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
help: check for equality instead of pattern matching
|
LL - let Some(C) = Some(S) else { return; };
LL + if Some(C) == Some(S) { return; };
|
```
The suggestion accounts for a few conditions:
- if the type is not from the local crate and has no `PartialEq` impl, the user can't make it structural, so we don't provide the suggestion
- regardless of whether the type is local or remote, if it has a manual `PartialEq`, explain that with a derived `PartialEq` you could use equality
- if the type is local and has no impl, suggest adding a derived `PartialEq` and use equality check instead of pattern matching
- when suggesting equality, account for `if-let` to suggest chaining (edition dependent), `match` arm with a present `if` check, `match` arm without an existing `if` check
- when encountering `let-else`, we suggest turning it into an `if` expression instead (this doesn't check for additional bindings beyond the constant, which would suggest incorrect code in some more complex cases).
Fixrust-lang/rust#42753.
`rustc_hir_analysis` depends on `rustc_lint` in just a single function:
`emit_delayed_lint`, which is used by the
"emit_ast_lowering_delayed_lints" checking section within
`rustc_hir_analysis::check_crate`.
This commit moves that function and section to out of
`rustc_hir_analysis::check_crate`, into `rustc_interface`, eliminating
the dependency. This seems reasonable because the delayed lint errors
aren't really related to HIR analysis. They were in there just because
HIR analysis follows AST lowering.
This means `rustc_hir_analysis` and `rustc_lint` can both start
compiling as soon as `rustc_trait_selection` finishes. This also changes
the error order in one test, which doesn't matter.
The commit also changes `emit_delayed_lint` to `emit_delayed_lints`,
factoring out some code duplicated in rustdoc.
danieljofficial