This PR will fix some typos detected by [typos].
I only picked the ones I was sure were spelling errors to fix, mostly in
the comments.
[typos]: https://github.com/crate-ci/typos
Remove separate indexing of early-bound regions
~Based on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99728.~
This PR copies some modifications from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/97839 around object lifetime defaults.
These modifications allow to stop counting generic parameters during lifetime resolution, and rely on the indexing given by `rustc_typeck::collect`.
add `depth_limit` in `QueryVTable` to avoid entering a new tcx in `layout_of`
Fixes#49735
Updates #48685
The `layout_of` query needs to check whether it overflows the depth limit, and the current implementation needs to create a new `ImplicitCtxt` inside `layout_of`. However, `start_query` will already create a new `ImplicitCtxt`, so we can check the depth limit in `start_query`.
We can tell whether we need to check the depth limit simply by whether the return value of `to_debug_str` of the query is `layout_of`. But I think adding the `depth_limit` field in `QueryVTable` may be more elegant and more scalable.
implied bounds: explicitly state which types are assumed to be wf
Adds a new query which maps each definition to the types which that definition assumes to be well formed. The intent is to make it easier to reason about implied bounds.
This change should not influence the user-facing behavior of rustc. Notably, `borrowck` still only assumes that the function signature of associated functions is well formed while `wfcheck` assumes that the both the function signature and the impl trait ref is well formed. Not sure if that by itself can trigger UB or whether it's just annoying.
As a next step, we can add `WellFormed` predicates to `predicates_of` of these items and can stop adding the wf bounds at each place which uses them. I also intend to move the computation from `assumed_wf_types` to `implied_bounds` into the `param_env` computation. This requires me to take a deeper look at `compare_predicate_entailment` which is currently somewhat weird wrt implied bounds so I am not touching this here.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Don't document impossible to call default trait items on impls
Closes#100176
This only skips documenting _default_ trait items on impls, not ones that are written inside the impl block. This is a conservative approach, since I think we should document all items written in an impl block (I guess unless hidden or whatever), but the existence of this new query I added makes this easy to extend to other rustdoc cases.
Implement `#[rustc_default_body_unstable]`
This PR implements a new stability attribute — `#[rustc_default_body_unstable]`.
`#[rustc_default_body_unstable]` controls the stability of default bodies in traits.
For example:
```rust
pub trait Trait {
#[rustc_default_body_unstable(feature = "feat", isssue = "none")]
fn item() {}
}
```
In order to implement `Trait` user needs to either
- implement `item` (even though it has a default implementation)
- enable `#![feature(feat)]`
This is useful in conjunction with [`#[rustc_must_implement_one_of]`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/92164), we may want to relax requirements for a trait, for example allowing implementing either of `PartialEq::{eq, ne}`, but do so in a safe way — making implementation of only `PartialEq::ne` unstable.
r? `@Aaron1011`
cc `@nrc` (iirc you were interested in this wrt `read_buf`), `@danielhenrymantilla` (you were interested in the related `#[rustc_must_implement_one_of]`)
P.S. This is my first time working with stability attributes, so I'm not sure if I did everything right 😅
This attribute allows to mark default body of a trait function as
unstable. This means that implementing the trait without implementing
the function will require enabling unstable feature.
This is useful in conjunction with `#[rustc_must_implement_one_of]`,
we may want to relax requirements for a trait, for example allowing
implementing either of `PartialEq::{eq, ne}`, but do so in a safe way
-- making implementation of only `PartialEq::ne` unstable.
Improves the diagnostic when a feature attribute is specified
unnecessarily but the feature implies another (i.e. it was partially
stabilized) to refer to the implied feature.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Fix FFI-unwind unsoundness with mixed panic mode
UB maybe introduced when an FFI exception happens in a `C-unwind` foreign function and it propagates through a crate compiled with `-C panic=unwind` into a crate compiled with `-C panic=abort` (#96926).
To prevent this unsoundness from happening, we will disallow a crate compiled with `-C panic=unwind` to be linked into `panic-abort` *if* it contains a call to `C-unwind` foreign function or function pointer. If no such call exists, then we continue to allow such mixed panic mode linking because it's sound (and stable). In fact we still need the ability to do mixed panic mode linking for std, because we only compile std once with `-C panic=unwind` and link it regardless panic strategy.
For libraries that wish to remain compile-once-and-linkable-to-both-panic-runtimes, a `ffi_unwind_calls` lint is added (gated under `c_unwind` feature gate) to flag any FFI unwind calls that will cause the linkable panic runtime be restricted.
In summary:
```rust
#![warn(ffi_unwind_calls)]
mod foo {
#[no_mangle]
pub extern "C-unwind" fn foo() {}
}
extern "C-unwind" {
fn foo();
}
fn main() {
// Call to Rust function is fine regardless ABI.
foo::foo();
// Call to foreign function, will cause the crate to be unlinkable to panic-abort if compiled with `-Cpanic=unwind`.
unsafe { foo(); }
//~^ WARNING call to foreign function with FFI-unwind ABI
let ptr: extern "C-unwind" fn() = foo::foo;
// Call to function pointer, will cause the crate to be unlinkable to panic-abort if compiled with `-Cpanic=unwind`.
ptr();
//~^ WARNING call to function pointer with FFI-unwind ABI
}
```
Fix#96926
`@rustbot` label: T-compiler F-c_unwind
Only keep a single query for well-formed checking
There are currently 3 queries to perform wf checks on different item-likes. This complexity is not required.
This PR replaces the query by:
- one query per item;
- one query to invoke it for a whole module.
This allows to remove HIR `ParItemLikeVisitor`.
Rename `impl_constness` to `constness`
The current code is a basis for `is_const_fn_raw`, and `impl_constness`
is no longer a valid name, which is previously used for determining the
constness of impls, and not items in general.
r? `@oli-obk`
The current code is a basis for `is_const_fn_raw`, and `impl_constness`
is no longer a valid name, which is previously used for determining the
constness of impls, and not items in general.
Compute lifetimes in scope at diagnostic time
The set of available lifetimes is currently computed during lifetime resolution on HIR. It is only used for one diagnostic.
In this PR, HIR lifetime resolution just reports whether elided lifetimes are well-defined at the place of use. The diagnostic code is responsible for building a list of lifetime names if elision is not allowed.
This will allow to remove lifetime resolution on HIR eventually.
Iterate over `maybe_unused_trait_imports` when checking dead trait imports
Closes#96873
r? `@cjgillot`
Some questions, if you have time:
- Is there a way to shorten the `rustc_data_structures::fx::FxIndexSet` path in the query declaration? I wasn't sure where to put a `use`.
- Was returning by reference from the query the right choice here?
- How would I go about evaluating the importance of the `is_dummy()` call in `check_crate`? I don't see failing tests when I comment it out. Should I just try to determine whether dummy spans can ever be put into `maybe_unused_trait_imports`?
- Am I doing anything silly with the various ID types?
- Is that `let-else` with `unreachable!()` bad? (i.e is there a better idiom? Would `panic!("<explanation>")` be better?)
- If I want to evaluate the perf of using a `Vec` as mentioned in #96873, is the best way to use the CI or is it feasible locally?
Thanks :)
