As a performance optimization, skip elaborating the supertraits of
`Sized`, and if a `MetaSized` obligation is being checked, then look for
a `Sized` predicate in the parameter environment. This makes the
`ParamEnv` smaller which should improve compiler performance as it avoids
all the iteration over the larger `ParamEnv`.
These tests just need blessing, they don't have any interesting behaviour
changes.
Some of these tests have new errors because `LegacyReceiver` cannot be
proven to be implemented now that it is also testing for `MetaSized` -
but this is just a consequence of the other errors in the test.
Expand the automatic implementation of `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized` so
that it is also implemented on non-`Sized` types, just not `ty::Foreign`
(extern type).
Introduce the `MetaSized` and `PointeeSized` traits as supertraits of
`Sized` and initially implement it on everything that currently
implements `Sized` to isolate any changes that simply adding the
traits introduces.
`tests/ui`: A New Order [7/N]
> [!NOTE]
>
> Intermediate commits are intended to help review, but will be squashed prior to merge.
Some `tests/ui/` housekeeping, to trim down number of tests directly under `tests/ui/`. Part of rust-lang/rust#133895.
Method errors have an extra check that force trim paths whenever the
normal string is longer than 10 characters, which can be quite unhelpful
when multiple items have the same name (for example an `Error`).
A user reported this force trimming as being quite unhelpful when they
had a method error where the precise path of the `Error` mattered.
The code uses `tcx.short_string` already to get the normal path, which
tries to be clever around trimming paths if necessary, so there is no
reason for this extra force trimming.
Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals`
Closes#131204
`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated
This will end up conflicting with the test in #138293 so whichever doesn't land first will need updating
--
# Stabilization Report
## General design
### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized?
[RFC 3695](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695), none.
### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.
None
### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?
None
## Has a call-for-testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?
Yes; only positive feedback was received.
## Implementation quality
### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)
Implemented in [#131034](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131034).
### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature
- [Basic usage, including `#[cfg()]`, `cfg!()` and `#[cfg_attr()]`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6d71251cf9e40326461f90f8ff9a7024706aea87/tests/ui/cfg/true-false.rs)
- [`--cfg=true/false` on the command line being accessible via `r#true/r#false`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/6d71251cf9e40326461f90f8ff9a7024706aea87/tests/ui/cfg/raw-true-false.rs)
- [Interaction with the unstable `#[doc(cfg(..))]` feature](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/rustdoc-ui/cfg-boolean-literal.rs)
- [Denying `--check-cfg=cfg(true/false)`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/ui/check-cfg/invalid-arguments.rs)
- Ensuring `--cfg false` on the command line doesn't change the meaning of `cfg(false)`: `tests/ui/cfg/cmdline-false.rs`
- Ensuring both `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)` on the same item result in it being disabled: `tests/ui/cfg/both-true-false.rs`
### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?
The above mentioned issue; it should not block as it interacts with another unstable feature.
### 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
- `@clubby789` (RFC)
- `@Urgau` (Implementation in rustc)
### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?
`rustdoc`'s unstable`#[doc(cfg(..)]` has been updated to respect it. `cargo` has been updated with a forward compatibility lint to enable supporting it in cargo once stabilized.
## Type system and execution rules
### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)
A few lines to be added to the reference for configuration predicates, specified in the RFC.
I'm removing empty identifiers everywhere, because in practice they
always mean "no identifier" rather than "empty identifier". (An empty
identifier is impossible.) It's better to use `Option` to mean "no
identifier" because you then can't forget about the "no identifier"
possibility.
Some specifics:
- When testing an attribute for a single name, the commit uses the
`has_name` method.
- When testing an attribute for multiple names, the commit uses the new
`has_any_name` method.
- When using `match` on an attribute, the match arms now have `Some` on
them.
In the tests, we now avoid printing empty identifiers by not printing
the identifier in the `error:` line at all, instead letting the carets
point out the problem.
This shows places where the use of `name_or_empty` causes problems, i.e.
we print empty identifiers in error messages:
```
error: unrecognized field name ``
error: `` isn't a valid `#[macro_export]` argument
`#[no_sanitize()]` should be applied to a function
```
(The last one is about an attribute `#[no_sanitize("address")]`.)
The next commit will fix these.
- Show the `#![ ... ]` in the span (to make it clear that it should not
be included in the CLI argument)
- Show more detailed errors when the crate has valid token trees but
invalid syntax.
Previously, `crate-attr=feature(foo),feature(bar)` would just say
"invalid crate attribute" and point at the comma. Now, it explicitly
says that the comma was unexpected, which is useful when using
`--error-format=short`. It also fixes the column to show the correct
span.
- Recover from parse errors. Previously we would abort immediately on
syntax errors; now we go on to try and type-check the rest of the
crate.
The new diagnostic code also happens to be slightly shorter.
Do not visit whole crate to compute `lints_that_dont_need_to_run`.
This allows to reuse the computed lint levels instead of re-visiting the whole crate.
Notes about tests:
- tests/ui/rfcs/rfc-2294-if-let-guard/feature-gate.rs: some messages are
now duplicated due to repeated parsing.
- tests/ui/rfcs/rfc-2497-if-let-chains/disallowed-positions.rs: ditto.
- `tests/ui/proc-macro/macro-rules-derive-cfg.rs`: the diff looks large
but the only difference is the insertion of a single
invisible-delimited group around a metavar.
- `tests/ui/attributes/nonterminal-expansion.rs`: a slight span
degradation, somehow related to the recent massive attr parsing
rewrite (#135726). I couldn't work out exactly what is going wrong,
but I don't think it's worth holding things up for a single slightly
suboptimal error message.
This change adds Fuchsia OS as a target to the cfg_attr in the
pre_main_constructor external declaration. This allows the
"tests/ui/attributes/used_with_archive.rs" to pass against Fuchsia.
Add `#[define_opaques]` attribute and require it for all type-alias-impl-trait sites that register a hidden type
Instead of relying on the signature of items to decide whether they are constraining an opaque type, the opaque types that the item constrains must be explicitly listed.
A previous version of this PR used an actual attribute, but had to keep the resolved `DefId`s in a side table.
Now we just lower to fields in the AST that have no surface syntax, instead a builtin attribute macro fills in those fields where applicable.
Note that for convenience referencing opaque types in associated types from associated methods on the same impl will not require an attribute. If that causes problems `#[defines()]` can be used to overwrite the default of searching for opaques in the signature.
One wart of this design is that closures and static items do not have generics. So since I stored the opaques in the generics of functions, consts and methods, I would need to add a custom field to closures and statics to track this information. During a T-types discussion we decided to just not do this for now.
fixes#131298
Jonathan Brouwer