This PR removes random remaining `Ident`s outside of libsyntax and performs general cleanup
In particular, interfaces of `Name` and `Ident` are tidied up, `Name`s and `Ident`s being small `Copy` aggregates are always passed to functions by value, and `Ident`s are never used as keys in maps, because `Ident` comparisons are tricky.
Although this PR closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/6993 there's still work related to it:
- `Name` can be made `NonZero` to compress numerous `Option<Name>`s and `Option<Ident>`s but it requires const unsafe functions.
- Implementation of `PartialEq` on `Ident` should be eliminated and replaced with explicit hygienic, non-hygienic or member-wise comparisons.
- Finally, large parts of AST can potentially be converted to `Name`s in the same way as HIR to clearly separate identifiers used in hygienic and non-hygienic contexts.
r? @nrc
Make sure Name, SyntaxContext and Ident are passed by value
Make sure Idents don't serve as keys (or parts of keys) in maps, Ident comparison is not well defined
Both `parse_tuple_struct_body` and `parse_item_struct` handled the case
of unit like struct. The redundancy is removed,
`parse_tuple_struct_body` now handles only real tuple structs.
`LocalSource` indicated wether a let binding originated from for-loop desugaring to enable specialized error messages, but for-loop expansion has changed and this is now achieved through `MatchSource::ForLoopDesugar`.
Macro desugaring of `in PLACE { BLOCK }` into "simpler" expressions following the in-development "Placer" protocol.
Includes Placer API that one can override to integrate support for `in` into one's own type. (See [RFC 809].)
[RFC 809]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0809-box-and-in-for-stdlib.md
Part of #22181
Replaced PR #26180.
Turns on the `in PLACE { BLOCK }` syntax, while leaving in support for the old `box (PLACE) EXPR` syntax (since we need to support that at least until we have a snapshot with support for `in PLACE { BLOCK }`.
(Note that we are not 100% committed to the `in PLACE { BLOCK }` syntax. In particular I still want to play around with some other alternatives. Still, I want to get the fundamental framework for the protocol landed so we can play with implementing it for non `Box` types.)
----
Also, this PR leaves out support for desugaring-based `box EXPR`. We will hopefully land that in the future, but for the short term there are type-inference issues injected by that change that we want to resolve separately.
Nick Cameron