Port `doc` attributes to new attribute API
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131229.
This PR ports the `doc` attributes to the new attribute API. However, there are things that will need to be fixed in a follow-up:
* Some part of `cfg_old.rs` are likely unused now, so they should be removed.
* Not all error/lints are emitted at the same time anymore, making them kinda less useful considering that you need to run and fix rustc/rustdoc multiple times to get through all of them.
* For coherency with the other attribute errors, I didn't modify the default output too much, meaning that we have some new messages now. I'll likely come back to that to check if the previous ones were better in a case-by-case approach.
* `doc(test(attr(...)))` is handled in a horrifying manner currently. Until we can handle it correctly with the `Attribute` system, it'll remain that thing we're all very ashamed of. 😈
* A type in rustdoc got its size increased, I'll check the impact on performance. But in any case, I plan to improve it in a follow-up so should be "ok".
* Because of error reporting, some fields of `Doc` are suboptimal, like `inline` which instead of being an `Option` is a `ThinVec` because we report the error later on. Part of the things I'm not super happy about but can be postponed to future me.
* In `src/librustdoc/clean/cfg.rs`, the `pub(crate) fn parse(cfg: &MetaItemInner) -> Result<Cfg, InvalidCfgError> {` function should be removed once `cfg_trace` has been ported to new `cfg` API.
* Size of type `DocFragment` went from 32 to 48. Would be nice to get it back to 32.
* ``malformed `doc` attribute input`` wasn't meant for so many candidates, should be improved.
* See how many of the checks in `check_attr` we can move to attribute parsing
* Port target checking to be in the attribute parser completely
* Fix target checking for `doc(alias)` on fields & patterns
And finally, once this PR is merged, I plan to finally stabilize `doc_cfg` feature. :)
cc `@jdonszelmann`
r? `@JonathanBrouwer`
lint: emit proper diagnostic for unsafe binders in improper_ctypes instead of ICE
Fixesrust-lang/rust#149719
This PR replaces the `todo!("FIXME(unsafe_binder)")` branch in the `improper_ctypes` lint with a proper diagnostic.
Previously, using an unsafe binder inside an extern `"C"` block caused an internal compiler error.
This fix now ensures that the compiler now emits a clear and stable error message explaining that types containing unsafe binders are not yet supported in FFI.
A new UI test `(unsafe-binder-basic.rs)` is included to ensure this behavior remains stable and prevent regressions.
Emit `check-cfg` lints during attribute parsing rather than evaluation
The goal of this PR is to make the `eval_config_entry` not have any side effects, by moving the check-cfg lints to the attribute parsing. This also helps ensure we do emit the lint in situations where the attribute happens to be parsed, but never evaluated.
cc ``@jdonszelmann`` ``@Urgau`` for a vibe check if you feel like it
Add a warn-by-default `unused_visibility` lint for visibility qualifiers
on `const _` declarations - e.g. `pub const _: () = ();`.
These have no effect.
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#147224 (Emscripten: Turn wasm-eh on by default)
- rust-lang/rust#149405 (Recover on misspelled item keyword)
- rust-lang/rust#149443 (Tidying up UI tests [6/N])
- rust-lang/rust#149524 (Move attribute safety checking to attribute parsing)
- rust-lang/rust#149593 (powf, powi: point out SNaN non-determinism)
- rust-lang/rust#149605 (Use branch name instead of HEAD when unshallowing)
- rust-lang/rust#149612 (Apply the `bors` environment also to the `outcome` job)
- rust-lang/rust#149623 (Don't require a normal tool build of clippy/rustfmt when running their test steps)
- rust-lang/rust#149627 (Point to the item that is incorrectly annotated with `#[diagnostic::on_const]`)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Add check if span is from macro expansion
The same thing I did in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/147416, actually the same bug but in another place, I'm not really sure how this method is good for fixing such ICEs, but, it does work and not conflicting with any existing tests, so I guess, it's fine
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/147408
r? compiler
Edvin Bryntesson