refactor(mgca): Change `DefKind::Const` and `DefKind::AssocConst` to have a `is_type_const` flag
Addresses rust-lang/rust#152940
- Changed `DefKind::Const` and `DefKind::AssocConst` to have a `is_type_const` flag.
- changed `is_type_const` query to check for this flag
- removed `is_rhs_type_const` query
r? @BoxyUwU
* refactor: add `is_type_const` flag to `DefKind::Const` and `AssocConst`
* refactor(cleanup) remove the `rhs_is_type_const` query
* style: fix formatting
* refactor: refactor stuff in librustdoc for new Const and AssocConst
* refactor: refactor clippy for the changes
* chore: formatting
* fix: fix test
* fix: fix suggestions
* Update context.rs
Co-authored-by: Boxy <rust@boxyuwu.dev>
* changed AssocKind::Const to store data about being a type const
add field representing types
*[View all comments](https://triagebot.infra.rust-lang.org/gh-comments/rust-lang/rust/pull/152730)*
> [!NOTE]
> This is a rewrite of #146307 by using a lang item instead of a custom `TyKind`. We still need a `hir::TyKind::FieldOf` variant, because resolving the field name cannot be done before HIR construction. The advantage of doing it this way is that we don't need to make any changes to types after HIR (including symbol mangling). At the very beginning of this feature implementation, I tried to do it using a lang item, but then quickly abandoned the approach, because at that time I was still intending to support nested fields.
Here is a [range-diff](https://triagebot.infra.rust-lang.org/gh-range-diff/rust-lang/rust/605f49b27444a738ea4032cb77e3bdc4eb811bab..d15f5052095b3549111854a2555dd7026b0a729e/605f49b27444a738ea4032cb77e3bdc4eb811bab..f5f42d1e03495dbaa23671c46b15fccddeb3492f) between the two PRs
---
# Add Field Representing Types (FRTs)
This PR implements the first step of the field projection lang experiment (Tracking Issue: rust-lang/rust#145383). Field representing types (FRTs) are a new kind of type. They can be named through the use of the `field_of!` macro with the first argument being the type and the second the name of the field (or variant and field in the case of an enum). No nested fields are supported.
FRTs natively implement the `Field` trait that's also added in this PR. It exposes information about the field such as the type of the field, the type of the base (i.e. the type that contains the field) and the offset within that base type. Only fields of non-packed structs are supported, fields of enums an unions have unique types for each field, but those do not implement the `Field` trait.
This PR was created in collaboration with @dingxiangfei2009, it wouldn't have been possible without him, so huge thanks for mentoring me!
I updated my library solution for field projections to use the FRTs from `core` instead of creating my own using the hash of the name of the field. See the [Rust-for-Linux/field-projection `lang-experiment` branch](https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/field-projection/tree/lang-experiment).
## API added to `core::field`
```rust
pub unsafe trait Field {
type Base;
type Type;
const OFFSET: usize;
}
pub macro field_of($Container:ty, $($fields:expr)+ $(,)?);
```
Along with a perma-unstable type that the compiler uses in the expansion of the macro:
```rust
#[unstable(feature = "field_representing_type_raw", issue = "none")]
pub struct FieldRepresentingType<T: ?Sized, const VARIANT: u32, const FIELD: u32> {
_phantom: PhantomData<T>,
}
```
## Explanation of Field Representing Types (FRTs)
FRTs are used for compile-time & trait-level reflection for fields of structs & tuples. Each struct & tuple has a unique compiler-generated type nameable through the `field_of!` macro. This type natively contains information about the field such as the outermost container, type of the field and its offset. Users may implement additional traits on these types in order to record custom information (for example a crate may define a [`PinnableField` trait](https://github.com/Rust-for-Linux/field-projection/blob/lang-experiment/src/marker.rs#L9-L23) that records whether the field is structurally pinned).
They are the foundation of field projections, a general operation that's generic over the fields of a struct. This genericism needs to be expressible in the trait system. FRTs make this possible, since an operation generic over fields can just be a function with a generic parameter `F: Field`.
> [!NOTE]
> The approach of field projections has changed considerably since this PR was opened. In the end we might not need FRTs, so this API is highly experimental.
FRTs should act as though they were defined as `struct MyStruct_my_field<StructGenerics>;` next to the struct. So it should be local to the crate defining the struct so that one can implement any trait for the FRT from that crate. The `Field` traits should be implemented by the compiler & populated with correct information (`unsafe` code needs to be able to rely on them being correct).
## TODOs
There are some `FIXME(FRTs)` scattered around the code:
- Diagnostics for `field_of!` can be improved
- `tests/ui/field_representing_types/nonexistent.rs`
- `tests/ui/field_representing_types/non-struct.rs`
- `tests/ui/field_representing_types/offset.rs`
- `tests/ui/field_representing_types/not-field-if-packed.rs`
- `tests/ui/field_representing_types/invalid.rs`
- Simple type alias already seem to work, but might need some extra work in `compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/hir_ty_lowering/mod.rs`
r? @oli-obk
For the attribute `FooBar` the parser is generally called `FooBarParser`
and the kind is called `AttributeKind::FooBar`. This commit renames some
cases that don't match that pattern. The most common cases:
- Adding `Rustc` to the front of the parser name for a `rustc_*`
attribute.
- Adding `Parser` to the end of a parser name.
- Slight word variations, e.g. `Deprecation` instead of `Deprecated`,
`Pointer` instead of `Ptr`, `Stability` instead of `Stable`.
Port #[rustc_test_marker] to the attribute parser
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131229
Targets:
Const is for normal tests (const test::TestDescAndFn is inserted before the test fn)
Const/Static/Fn is for custom_test_framework's #[test_case] e.g. tests/ui/custom_test_frameworks/full.rs
r? @JonathanBrouwer
Again I left the use-sites as is since they are early uses.
Remove `deprecated_safe` and its corresponding feature gate
This unimplements the feature gate for tracking issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/94978
The author of that tracking issue and the MCP seem to no longer exist
Afaik we can just do this, but let me know if I'm wrong
Because this feature has been idle for 3+ years, and it is in the way to finish the attribute refactoring (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131229#issuecomment-2971351163)
When someone wants to do work on it the feature gate can be re-added
r? @jdonszelmann
bors