Strengthen validation of FFI attributes
Previously, `codegen_attrs` validated the attributes `#[ffi_pure]`, `#[ffi_const]`, and `#[ffi_returns_twice]` to make sure that they were only used on foreign functions. However, this validation was insufficient in two ways:
1. `codegen_attrs` only sees items for which code must be generated, so it was unable to raise errors when the attribute was incorrectly applied to macros and the like.
2. the validation code only checked that the item with the attr was foreign, but not that it was a foreign function, allowing these attributes to be applied to foreign statics as well.
This PR moves the validation to `check_attr`, which sees all items. It additionally changes the validation to ensure that the attribute's target is `Target::ForeignFunction`, only allowing the attributes on foreign functions and not foreign statics. Because these attributes are unstable, there is no risk for backwards compatibility. The changes also ending up making the code much easier to read.
This PR is best reviewed commit by commit. Additionally, I was considering moving the tests to the `attribute` subdirectory, to get them out of the general UI directory. I could do that as part of this PR or a follow-up, as the reviewer prefers.
CC: #58328, #58329
Do not depend on Generator trait when deducing closure signature
1. Do not depend on `Generator` trait when deducing closure signature.
2. Compare the name of the `Generator::Return` associated item, rather than its order in the trait. Seems more stable this way.
Fixing confusion between mod and remainder
Like many programming languages, rust too confuses remainder and modulus. The `%` operator and the associated `Rem` trait is (as the trait name suggests) the remainder, but since most people are linguistically more familiar with the modulus the documentation sometimes claims otherwise. This PR tries to fix this problem in rustc.
PointeeInfo is advisory only
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/107248 fixed PointeeInfo being used in ways that don't actually work. Hopefully this comments helps avoid such issues in the future.
Cc ``@eddyb``
Track bound types like bound regions
When we instantiate bound types into placeholder types, we throw away the names for some reason. These names are particularly useful for error reporting once we have `for<T>` binders.
r? types
small refactor to new projection code
extract `eq_term_and_make_canonical_response` into a helper function which also is another guarantee that the expected term does not influence candidate selection for projections.
also change `evaluate_all(vec![single_goal])` to use `evaluate_goal`.
the second commit now also adds a `debug_assert!` to `evaluate_goal`.
make unaligned_reference a hard error
The `unaligned_references` lint has been warn-by-default since Rust 1.53 (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/82525) and deny-by-default with mention in cargo future-incompat reports since Rust 1.62 (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/95372). Current nightly will become Rust 1.66, so (unless major surprises show up with crater) I think it is time we make this a hard error, and close this old soundness gap in the language.
EDIT: Turns out this will only land for Rust 1.67, so there is another 6 weeks of time here for crates to adjust.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/82523.
Bump bootstrap compiler to 1.68
This also changes our stage0.json to include the rustc component for the rustfmt pinned nightly toolchain, which is currently necessary due to rustfmt dynamically linking to that toolchain's librustc_driver and libstd.
r? `@pietroalbini`
Modify primary span label for E0308
Looking at the reactions to https://hachyderm.io/`@ekuber/109622160673605438,` a lot of people seem to have trouble understanding the current output, where the primary span label on type errors talks about the specific types that diverged, but these can be deeply nested type parameters. Because of that we could see "expected i32, found u32" in the label while the note said "expected Vec<i32>, found Vec<u32>". This understandably confuses people. I believe that once people learn to read these errors it starts to make more sense, but this PR changes the output to be more in line with what people might expect, without sacrificing terseness.
Fix#68220.
incremental: migrate diagnostics
- Apply the diagnostic migration lints to more functions on `Session`, namely: `span_warn`, `span_warn_with_code`, `warn` `note_without_error`, `span_note_without_error`, `struct_note_without_error`.
- Add impls of `IntoDiagnosticArg` for `std::io::Error`, `std::path::Path` and `std::path::PathBuf`.
- Migrate the `rustc_incremental` crate's diagnostics to translatable diagnostic structs.
r? `@compiler-errors`
cc #100717
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #107245 (Implement unsizing in the new trait solver)
- #107445 (Remove `GenFuture` from core)
- #107473 (Update books)
- #107476 (rustdoc: remove unnecessary wrapper `div.item-decl` from HTML)
- #107477 (Migrate last part of CSS themes to CSS variables)
- #107479 (Use `ObligationCtxt::new_in_snapshot` in `satisfied_from_param_env`)
- #107482 (rustdoc: remove meta keywords from HTML)
- #107494 (fix link in std::path::Path::display())
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Use `ObligationCtxt::new_in_snapshot` in `satisfied_from_param_env`
We can evaluate nested `ConstEvaluatable` obligations in an evaluation probe, which will ICE if we use `ObligationCtxt::new`.
Fixes#107474Fixes#106666
r? `@BoxyUwU` but feel free to reassign
cc `@JulianKnodt` who i think added this assertion code
Not sure if the rustdoc test is needed, but can't hurt. They're the same root cause, though.
Implement unsizing in the new trait solver
This makes hello world compile! Ignore the first commit, that's just #107146 which is waiting on merge.
I'll leave some comments inline about design choices that might be debatable.
r? `@lcnr` (until we have a new trait solver reviewer group...)
Fix invalid float literal suggestions when recovering an integer
Only suggest adding a zero to integers with a preceding dot when the change will result in a valid floating point literal.
For example, `.0x0` should not be turned into `0.0x0`.
r? nnethercote
Only suggest adding a zero to integers with a preceding dot when the change will
result in a valid floating point literal.
For example, `.0x0` should not be turned into `0.0x0`.
assume MIR types are fully normalized in ascribe_user_type
This FIXME was introduced in c6a17bf8bc but it should've been restricted to `ascribe_user_type_skip_wf`.
