Add compiler error when trying to use concat metavar expr in repetitions
## Disclaimer
This is my first PR to rust, so if I missed/could improve something about this PR, please excuse and tell me!
## The improvement
The [metavar_expr_concat feature](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/124225) currently does not seem to support nested repetitions, and throws an ICE without much explanation if the relevant code path is hit.
This PR adds a draft compiler error that attempts to explain the issue. I am not 100% sure what all the ways of triggering this error are, so the message is currently pretty generic, please do correct me if there's something wrong with it or it could be improved.
Thank you for you time!
Fixesrust-lang/rust#140479.
add span to struct pattern rest (..)
Struct pattern rest (`..`) did not retain span information compared to normal fields. This patch adds span information for it.
The motivation of this patch comes from when I implemented this PR for Clippy: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/pull/15000#discussion_r2134145163
It is possible to get the span of the Et cetera in a bit roundabout way, but I thought this would be nicer.
stabilize c-style varargs for sysv64, win64, efiapi, aapcs
This has been split up so the PR now only contains the extended_varargs_abi_support stabilization; "system" has been moved to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/145954.
**Previous (combined) PR description:**
This stabilizes extern block declarations of variadic functions with the system, sysv64, win64, efiapi, aapcs ABIs. This corresponds to the extended_varargs_abi_support and extern_system_varargs feature gates.
The feature gates were split up since it seemed like there might be further discussion needed for what exactly "system" ABI variadic functions should do, but a [consensus](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136946#issuecomment-2967847553) has meanwhile been reached: they shall behave like "C" functions. IOW, the ABI of a "system" function is (bold part is new in this PR):
- "stdcall" for win32 targets **for non-variadic functions**
- "C" for everything else
This had been previously stabilized *without FCP* in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116161, which got reverted in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/136897. There was also a "fun" race condition involved with the system ABI being [added](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119587) to the list of variadic-supporting ABIs between the creation and merge of rust-lang/rust#116161.
There was a question raised [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116161#issuecomment-1983829513) whether t-lang even needs to be involved for a change like this. Not sure if that has meanwhile been clarified? The behavior of the "system" ABI (a Rust-specific ABI) definitely feels like t-lang territory to me.
Fixesrust-lang/rust#100189
Cc `@rust-lang/lang`
# 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?
AFAIK there is no RFC. The tracking issues are
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/100189
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136946
> ### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.
The only controversial point is whether "system" ABI functions should support variadics.
- Pro: This allows crates like windows-rs to consistently use "system", see e.g. https://github.com/microsoft/windows-rs/issues/3626.
- Cons: `@workingjubilee` had some implementation concerns, but I think those have been [resolved](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/136946#issuecomment-2967847553). EDIT: turns out Jubilee still has concerns (she mentioned that in a DM); I'll let her express those.
Note that "system" is already a magic ABI we introduced to "do the right thing". This just makes it do the right thing in more cases. In particular, it means that on Windows one can almost always just do
```rust
extern "system" {
// put all the things here
}
```
and it'll do the right thing, rather than having to split imports into non-varargs and varargs, with the varargs in a separate `extern "C"` block (and risking accidentally putting a non-vararg there).
(I am saying "almost" always because some Windows API functions actually use cdecl, not stdcall, on x86. Those of course need to go in `extern "C"` blocks.)
> ### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?
Actually defining variadic functions in Rust remains unstable, under the [c_variadic feature gate](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44930).
> ## Has a Call for Testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?
>
> Does any OSS nightly users use this feature? For instance, a useful indication might be "search <grep.app> for `#![feature(FEATURE_NAME)]` and had `N` results".
There was no call for testing.
A search brings up https://github.com/rust-osdev/uefi-rs/blob/main/uefi-raw/src/table/boot.rs using this for "efiapi". This doesn't seem widely used, but it is an "obvious" gap in our support for c-variadics.
> ## Implementation quality
All rustc does here is forward the ABI to LLVM so there's lot a lot to say here...
> ### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)
>
> An example for async closures: <https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/coroutine-closures.html>.
The check for allowed variadic ABIs is [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/9c870d30e2d6434c9e9a004b450c5ccffdf3d844/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/lib.rs#L109-L126).
The special handling of "system" is [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/c24914ec8329b22ec7bcaa6ab534a784b2bd8ab9/compiler/rustc_target/src/spec/abi_map.rs#L82-L85).
> ### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature
>
> Consider what the "edges" of this feature are. We're particularly interested in seeing tests that assure us about exactly what nearby things we're not stabilizing.
>
> Within each test, include a comment at the top describing the purpose of the test and what set of invariants it intends to demonstrate. This is a great help to those reviewing the tests at stabilization time.
>
> - What does the test coverage landscape for this feature look like?
> - Tests for compiler errors when you use the feature wrongly or make mistakes?
> - Tests for the feature itself:
> - Limits of the feature (so failing compilation)
> - Exercises of edge cases of the feature
> - Tests that checks the feature works as expected (where applicable, `//@ run-pass`).
> - Are there any intentional gaps in test coverage?
>
> Link to test folders or individual tests (ui/codegen/assembly/run-make tests, etc.).
Prior PRs add a codegen test for all ABIs and tests actually calling extern variadic functions for sysv64 and win64:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/144359
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/144379
We don't have a way of executing uefi target code in the test suite, so it's unclear how to fully test efiapi. aapcs could probably be done? (But note that we have hardly an such actually-calling-functions tests for ABI things, we almost entirely rely on codegen tests.)
The test ensuring that we do *not* stabilize *defining* c-variadic functions is `tests/ui/feature-gates/feature-gate-c_variadic.rs`.
> ### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?
None that I am aware of.
> ### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there?
None that I am aware of.
> ### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization
`@Soveu` added sysv64, win64, efiapi, aapcs to the list of ABIs that allow variadics, `@beepster4096` added system. `@workingjubilee` recently refactored the ABI handling in the compiler, also affecting this feature.
> ### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?
>
> Consider rustdoc, clippy, rust-analyzer, rustfmt, rustup, docs.rs.
Maybe RA needs to be taught about the new allowed ABIs? No idea how precisely they mirror what exactly rustc accepts and rejects here.
> ## Type system and execution rules
> ### What compilation-time checks are done that are needed to prevent undefined behavior?
>
> (Be sure to link to tests demonstrating that these tests are being done.)
Nothing new here, this just expands the existing support for calling variadic functions to more ABIs.
> ### Does the feature's implementation need checks to prevent UB or is it sound by default and needs opt in in places to perform the dangerous/unsafe operations? If it is not sound by default, what is the rationale?
Nothing new here, this just expands the existing support for calling variadic functions to more ABIs.
> ### Can users use this feature to introduce undefined behavior, or use this feature to break the abstraction of Rust and expose the underlying assembly-level implementation? (Describe.)
Nothing new here, this just expands the existing support for calling variadic functions to more ABIs.
> ### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)
- https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1936
> ## Common interactions
> ### Does this feature introduce new expressions and can they produce temporaries? What are the lifetimes of those temporaries?
No.
> ### What other unstable features may be exposed by this feature?
None.
`-Znext-solver`: support non-defining uses in closures
Cleaned up version of rust-lang/rust#139587, finishing the implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/types-team/issues/129. This does not affect stable. The reasoning for why this is the case is subtle however.
## What does it do
We split `do_mir_borrowck` into `borrowck_collect_region_constraints` and `borrowck_check_region_constraints`, where `borrowck_collect_region_constraints` returns an enormous `CollectRegionConstraintsResult` struct which contains all the relevant data to actually handle opaque type uses and to check the region constraints later on.
`query mir_borrowck` now simply calls `BorrowCheckRootCtxt::do_mir_borrowck` which starts by iterating over all nested bodies of the current function - visiting nested bodies before their parents - and computing their `CollectRegionConstraintsResult`.
After we've collected all constraints it's time to actually compute the concrete types for the opaques defined by this function. With this PR we now compute the concrete types of opaques for each body before using them to check the non-defining uses of any of them.
After we've computed the concrete types by using all bodies, we use `apply_computed_concrete_opaque_types` for each body to constrain non-defining uses, before finally finishing with `borrowck_check_region_constraints`. We always visit nested bodies before their parents when doing this.
## `ClosureRegionRequirements`
As we only call `borrowck_collect_region_constraints` for nested bodies before type checking the parent, we can't simply use the final `ClosureRegionRequirements` of the nested body during MIR type check. We instead track that we need to apply these requirements in `deferred_closure_requirements`.
We now manually apply the final closure requirements to each body after handling opaque types.
This works, except that we may need the region constraints of nested bodies to successfully define an opaque type in the parent. This is handled by using a new `fn compute_closure_requirements_modulo_opaques` which duplicates region checking - while ignoring any errors - before we've added the constraints from `apply_computed_concrete_opaque_types`. This is necessary for a lot of async tests, as pretty much the entire function is inside of an async block while the opaque type gets defined in the parent.
As an performance optimization we only use `fn compute_closure_requirements_modulo_opaques` in case the nested body actually depends on any opaque types. Otherwise we eagerly call `borrowck_check_region_constraints` and apply the final closure region requirements right away.
## Impact on stable code
Handling the opaque type uses in the parent function now only uses the closure requirements *modulo opaques*, while it previously also considered member constraints from nested bodies. `External` regions are never valid choice regions. Also, member constraints will never constrain a member region if it is required to be outlived by an external region, as that fails the upper-bound check. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/564ee219127b796d56f74767366fd359758b97de/compiler/rustc_borrowck/src/region_infer/opaque_types/member_constraints.rs#L90-L96
Member constraints therefore never add constraints for external regions :>
r? `@BoxyUwU`
pub async fn impl is monomorphized when func itself is monomorphized
Implentation coroutine (`func::{closure#0}`) is monomorphized, when func itself is monomorphized.
Currently, when `pub async fn foo(..)` is exported from lib and used in several dependent crates, only 'header' function is monomorphized in the defining crate. 'header' function, returning coroutine object, is monomorphized, but the coroutine's poll function (which actually implements all the logic for the function) is not. In such situation, `func::{closure#0}` will be monomorphized in every dependency.
This PR adds monomorphization for `func::{closure#0}` (coroutine poll function), when func itself is monomorphized.
Simple test with one lib async function and ten dependent crates (executable) that use the function, shows 5-7% compilation time improvement (single-threaded).
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#145468 (dedup recip, powi, to_degrees, and to_radians float tests)
- rust-lang/rust#145643 (coverage: Build an "expansion tree" and use it to unexpand raw spans)
- rust-lang/rust#145754 (fix(lexer): Don't require frontmatters to be escaped with indented fences)
- rust-lang/rust#146060 (fixup nix dev shell again)
- rust-lang/rust#146068 (compiletest: Capture panic messages via a custom panic hook)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
fix(lexer): Don't require frontmatters to be escaped with indented fences
The RFC only limits hyphens at the beginning of lines and not if they are indented or embedded in other content.
Sticking to that approach was confirmed by the T-lang liason at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/141367#issuecomment-3202217544
There is a regression in error message quality which I'm leaving for someone if they feel this needs improving.
Tracking issue: rust-lang/rust#136889Fixesrust-lang/rust#141367
coverage: Build an "expansion tree" and use it to unexpand raw spans
Historically and currently, coverage instrumentation assumes that all of a function's spans are in the same file and have the same syntax context. The spans extracted directly from MIR don't satisfy that assumption, so there is an “unexpansion” step that walks up each span's expansion-call-site tree to find a suitable span in the same context as the function's body span.
(That unexpansion step is what allows us to have somewhat reasonable coverage instrumentation for macros like `println!`, and for syntax like `for` and `?` that undergo desugaring expansion.)
The current unexpansion code mostly works fine in that “flat” single-file single-context world. But it's not suitable for incremental work towards proper expansion-aware coverage instrumentation, which would allow a function's coverage spans to encompass multiple expansion contexts and multiple files.
This PR therefore replaces the current unexpansion code with a more sophisticated system that uses the raw MIR spans to reconstruct an “expansion tree”, and then uses that tree to help perform most of the unexpansion work.
Building the tree is “overkill” for current unexpansion needs (though it does give some minor edge-case improvements), but my hope is that having the explicit tree available will be a big help when taking the next steps towards proper expansion-region support.
Suggest method name with maybe ty mismatch
Fixesrust-lang/rust#146008
I think it's ok to suggest method name even when the return ty mismatch, since we only reporting in `Applicability::MaybeIncorrect`, user may add `()` and continue to fix following errors.
r? ```@estebank```
Detect negative literal inferred to unsigned integer
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `usize: Neg` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/negative-literal-infered-to-unsigned.rs:2:14
|
LL | for x in -5..5 {
| ^^ the trait `Neg` is not implemented for `usize`
|
help: consider specifying an integer type that can be negative
|
LL | for x in -5isize..5 {
| +++++
```
Applying this suggestion will always end up in another E0308 error at the point where the unsigned inference comes from, which should help with understanding what the actual problem is.
Fixrust-lang/rust#83413.
Fix format string grammar in docs and improve alignment error message for #144023
This PR improves error messages and documentation for format strings involving alignment and formatting traits.
Highlights:
- Clearer error messages for invalid alignment specifiers (e.g., `{0:#X>18}`), showing the expected `<`, `^`, or `>` and a working example:
println!("{0:>#18X}", value);
- Updated UI test `format-alignment-hash.rs` to reflect the improved error output.
- Documentation clarification: ensures examples correctly show how width, alignment, and traits like `x`, `X`, `#` combine.
Motivation:
Previously, using `#` with alignment and width produced confusing errors. This PR guides users on the correct syntax and provides actionable examples.
Testing:
- Built the compiler (`./x build`)
- Blessed and ran UI tests (`./x. test src/test/ui/fmt/format-alignment-hash.rs --bless`)
- Verified full test suite passes (`./x test`)
Issue: rust-lang/rust#144023
Detect missing `if let` or `let-else`
During `let` binding parse error and encountering a block, detect if there is a likely missing `if` or `else`:
```
error: expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator, found `{`
--> $DIR/missing-if-let-or-let-else.rs:14:25
|
LL | let Some(x) = foo() {
| ^ expected one of `.`, `;`, `?`, `else`, or an operator
|
help: you might have meant to use `if let`
|
LL | if let Some(x) = foo() {
| ++
help: alternatively, you might have meant to use `let else`
|
LL | let Some(x) = foo() else {
| ++++
```
Fixrust-lang/rust#107806.
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `usize: Neg` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/negative-literal-infered-to-unsigned.rs:2:14
|
LL | for x in -5..5 {
| ^^ the trait `Neg` is not implemented for `usize`
|
help: consider specifying an integer type that can be negative
|
LL | for x in -5isize..5 {
| +++++
```
Add managarm as a tier 3 target
This PR aims to introduce the `x86_64-unknown-managarm-mlibc` as a tier 3 target to Rust.
[managarm](https://github.com/managarm/managarm) is a microkernel with fully asynchronous I/O that also provides a POSIX server. Despite the differences, managarm provides good compatability with POSIX and Linux APIs. As a rule of thumb, barring OS-specific code, it should be mostly source-compatible with Linux.
We have been shipping a patched rust for over 25 releases now, and we would like to upstream our work. For a smoother process, this PR only adds the target to rustc and some documentation. `std` support will be added in a future PR.
## Addressing the tier 3 target policy
> 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.)
`@no92,` `@64` and `@Dennisbonke` will be target maintainers.
> 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.
> - 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.
> - If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name. Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
`x86_64-unknown-managarm-mlibc` is what we use for LLVM as well.
> 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.
> - The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
> - Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
> - 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.
> - 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.
> - "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.
[managarm](https://github.com/managarm/managarm) is licensed as MIT. No dependencies were added.
> 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.
> - 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. None of the listed maintainers are on a Rust team.
> 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.
Support for `std` will be provided in a future PR. Only minor changes are required, however they depend on support in the `libc` crate which will be PRed in soon.
> 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.
The steps needed to take are described in the documentation provided with this PR.
> 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.
> - 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.
We have no indication that anything breaks due to this PR.
> Tier 3 targets must be able to produce assembly using at least one of rustc's supported backends from any host target.
No problems here, as we target `x86_64`.
r? compiler-team
compiler: Include span of too huge enum with `-Cdebuginfo=2`
We have the ui test `tests/ui/limits/huge-enum.rs` to ensure we emit an error if we encounter too big enums. Before this fix, compiling the test with `-Cdebuginfo=2` would not include the span of the instantiation site, because the error is then emitted from a different code path that does not include the span.
Propagate the span to the error also in the debuginfo case, so the test passes regardless of debuginfo level. I'm sure we can propagate spans in more places, but let's start small.
## Test failure without the fix
Here is what the failure looks like if you run the test without the fix:
```
[ui] tests/ui/limits/huge-enum.rs#full-debuginfo ... F
.
failures:
---- [ui] tests/ui/limits/huge-enum.rs#full-debuginfo stdout ----
Saved the actual stderr to `/home/martin/src/rust/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/ui/limits/huge-enum.full-debuginfo/huge-enum.full-debuginfo.stderr`
diff of stderr:
1 error: values of the type `Option<TYPE>` are too big for the target architecture
- --> $DIR/huge-enum.rs:17:9
- |
- LL | let big: BIG = None;
- | ^^^
6
7 error: aborting due to 1 previous error
8
The actual stderr differed from the expected stderr
To update references, rerun the tests and pass the `--bless` flag
To only update this specific test, also pass `--test-args limits/huge-enum.rs`
```
as can be seen, the `span` used to be missing with `debuginfo=2`.
## See also
This is one small step towards resolving rust-lang/rust#61117.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/144499 which began running UI tests with `rust.debuginfo-level-tests=1`. This PR is part of preparing for increasing that to debuglevel 2.
Rehome 30 `tests/ui/issues/` tests to other subdirectories under `tests/ui/` [#2 of Batch #2]
Part of rust-lang/rust#133895
Methodology:
1. Refer to the previously written `tests/ui/SUMMARY.md`
2. Find an appropriate category for the test, using the original issue thread and the test contents.
3. Add the issue URL at the bottom (not at the top, as that would mess up stderr line numbers)
4. Rename the tests to make their purpose clearer
Inspired by the methodology that `@Kivooeo` was using.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Rehome 30 `tests/ui/issues/` tests to other subdirectories under `tests/ui/` [#1 of Batch #2]
Part of rust-lang/rust#133895
Methodology:
1. Refer to the previously written `tests/ui/SUMMARY.md`
2. Find an appropriate category for the test, using the original issue thread and the test contents.
3. Add the issue URL at the bottom (not at the top, as that would mess up stderr line numbers)
4. Rename the tests to make their purpose clearer
Inspired by the methodology that `@Kivooeo` was using.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Switch next solver to use a specific associated type for trait def id
The compiler just puts `DefId` in there, but rust-analyzer uses different types for each kind of item.
See [the Zulip discussion](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/185405-t-compiler.2Frust-analyzer/topic/Implmentating.20New.20Trait.20Solver/near/534329794). In short, it will be a tremendous help to r-a to use specific associated types, while for the solver and the compiler it's a small change. So I ported `TraitId`, as a proof of concept and it's also likely the most impactful.
r? types
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#142472 (Add new `doc(attribute = "...")` attribute)
- rust-lang/rust#145368 (CFI: Make `lto` and `linker-plugin-lto` work the same for `compiler_builtins`)
- rust-lang/rust#145853 (Improve error messages around invalid literals in attribute arguments)
- rust-lang/rust#145920 (bootstrap: Explicitly mark the end of a failed test's captured output)
- rust-lang/rust#145937 (add doc-hidden to exports in attribute prelude)
- rust-lang/rust#145965 (Move exporting of profiler and sanitizer symbols to the LLVM backend)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Improve error messages around invalid literals in attribute arguments
r? `@jdonszelmann`
This previously created two errors, which is a bit ugly and the second one didn't add any value
Blocked on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143193
CFI: Make `lto` and `linker-plugin-lto` work the same for `compiler_builtins`
Fixrust-lang/rust#142284 by ensuring that `#![no_builtins]` crates can still emit bitcode when proper (i.e., non-rustc) LTO (i.e., -Clinker-plugin-lto) is used.
Add new `doc(attribute = "...")` attribute
Fixesrust-lang/rust#141123.
The implementation and purpose of this new `#[doc(attribute = "...")]` attribute is very close to `#[doc(keyword = "...")]`. Which means that luckily for us, most of the code needed was already in place and `@Noratrieb` nicely wrote a first draft that helped me implement this new attribute very fast.
Now with all this said, there is one thing I didn't do yet: adding a `rustdoc-js-std` test. I added GUI tests with search results for attributes so should be fine but I still plan on adding one for it once documentation for builtin attributes will be written into the core/std libs.
You can test it [here](https://rustdoc.crud.net/imperio/doc-attribute-attribute/foo/index.html).
cc `@Noratrieb` `@Veykril`
The RFC only limits hyphens at the beginning of lines and not if they
are indented or embedded in other content.
Sticking to that approach was confirmed by the T-lang liason at
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/141367#issuecomment-3202217544
There is a regression in error message quality which I'm leaving for
someone if they feel this needs improving.
We have a ui test to ensure we emit an error if we encounter too big
enums. Before this fix, compiling the test with `-Cdebuginfo=2` would
not include the span of the instantiation site, because the error is
then emitted from a different code path that does not include the span.
Propagate the span to the error also in the debuginfo case, so the test
passes regardless of debuginfo level.
When determining if a trait has no entries for the purposes of omitting vptrs from subtrait vtables, consider its transitive supertraits' entries, instead of just its own entries.
When determining if a non-first supertrait vptr can be omitted from a subtrait vtable, check if the supertrait or any of its (transitive) supertraits have methods, instead of only checking if the supertrait itself has methods.
This fixes the soundness issue where a vptr would be omitted for a supertrait with no methods but that itself had a supertrait with methods, while still optimizing the case where the supertrait is "truly" empty (it has no own vtable entries, and none of its (transitive) supertraits have any own vtable entries).
Fixes <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/145752>
-----
Old description:
~~Treat all non-auto traits as non-empty (possibly having methods) for purposes of determining if we need to emit a vptr for a non-direct supertrait (and for new "sibling" entries after a direct or non-direct supertrait).~~
This fixes (I believe) the soundness issue, ~~but regresses vtable sizes and possibly upcasting perf in some cases when using trait hierarchies with empty non-auto traits (see `tests/ui/traits/vtable/multiple-markers.stderr`) since we use vptrs in some cases where we could re-use the vtable.~~
Fixes <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/145752>
Re-opens (not anymore) <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/114942>
Should not affect <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131813> (i.e. the soundness issue is still fixed, ~~though the relevant vtables in the `trait Evil` example will be larger now~~)
cc implementation history <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131864> <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/113856>
-----
~~It should be possible to check if a trait has any methods from itself *or* supertraits (instead of just from itself), but to fix the immediate soundness issue, just assume any non-auto trait could have methods. A more optimistic check can be implemented later (or if someone does it soon it could just supercede this PR 😄).~~ Done in latest push
`@rustbot` label A-dyn-trait F-trait_upcasting
Rename `Location::file_with_nul` to `file_as_c_str`
This renames the method to be consistent with the ongoing T-libs-api FCP found at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/141727#issuecomment-3228016708.
I did not rename the unstable feature as we are going to be stabilizing it soon anyway. This will probably break RfL, so it will require an updated commit hash for the Linux Kernel that I will add here soon.
r? `@Amanieu`
No source fixes
This PR started as a fix for a rendering bug that [got noticed in #143661](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143661#discussion_r2199109530), but turned into a fix for any rendering bugs related to files with no source.
- Don't add an end column separator after a file with no source
- Add column separator before secondary messages with no source
- Render continuation between no source labels
Before
```
error[E0423]: expected function, tuple struct or tuple variant, found struct `std::collections::HashMap`
╭▸ $DIR/multi-suggestion.rs:17:13
│
LL │ let _ = std::collections::HashMap();
│ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
╭▸ $SRC_DIR/std/src/collections/hash/map.rs:LL:COL
│
╰ note: `std::collections::HashMap` defined here
╰╴
note: constructor is not visible here due to private fields
╭▸ $SRC_DIR/alloc/src/boxed.rs:LL:COL
│
╰ note: private field
│
╰ note: private field
```
After
```
error[E0423]: expected function, tuple struct or tuple variant, found struct `std::collections::HashMap`
╭▸ $DIR/multi-suggestion.rs:17:13
│
LL │ let _ = std::collections::HashMap();
│ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
╰╴
╭▸ $SRC_DIR/std/src/collections/hash/map.rs:LL:COL
│
╰ note: `std::collections::HashMap` defined here
note: constructor is not visible here due to private fields
╭▸ $SRC_DIR/alloc/src/boxed.rs:LL:COL
│
├ note: private field
│
╰ note: private field
```
Note: This PR also makes it so `rustc` and `annotate-snippets` match in these cases
Guillaume Gomez