codegen: memmove/memset cannot be non-temporal
non-temporal memset is not a thing.
And for memmove, since the LLVM backend doesn't support this, surely we don't need it in the GCC backend.
Eliminate some `FIXME(lcnr)` comments
In some cases this involved changing code. In some cases the comment was able to removed or replaced.
r? ``@lcnr``
Rename `Generics::params` to `Generics::own_params`
I hope this makes it slightly more obvious that `generics.own_params` is insufficient when considering nested items. I didn't actually audit any of the usages, for the record.
r? lcnr
`InferCtxt::next_{ty,const}_var*` all take an origin, but the
`param_def_id` is almost always `None`. This commit changes them to just
take a `Span` and build the origin within the method, and adds new
methods for the rare cases where `param_def_id` might not be `None`.
This avoids a lot of tedious origin building.
Specifically:
- next_ty_var{,_id_in_universe,_in_universe}: now take `Span` instead of
`TypeVariableOrigin`
- next_ty_var_with_origin: added
- next_const_var{,_in_universe}: takes Span instead of ConstVariableOrigin
- next_const_var_with_origin: added
- next_region_var, next_region_var_in_universe: these are unchanged,
still take RegionVariableOrigin
The API inconsistency (ty/const vs region) seems worth it for the
large conciseness improvements.
`InferCtxt::next_{ty,const,int,float}_var_id` each have a single call
site, in `InferCtt::next_{ty,const,int,float}_var` respectively.
The only remaining method that creates a var_id is
`InferCtxt::next_ty_var_id_in_universe`, which has one use outside the
crate.
Make `#![feature]` suggestion MaybeIncorrect
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/12784
The `unstable_name_collisions` lint uses `disabled_nightly_features` to mention the feature name, but accepting the suggestion would result in an ambiguity error
There are other calls where accepting the feature gate would fix code when ran with `cargo fix --broken-code`, though it's not always desirable to add a feature gate even if the user is currently on nightly so MaybeIncorrect seems appropriate
Add `ErrorGuaranteed` to `Recovered::Yes` and use it more.
The starting point for this was identical comments on two different fields, in `ast::VariantData::Struct` and `hir::VariantData::Struct`:
```
// FIXME: investigate making this a `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>`
recovered: bool
```
I tried that, and then found that I needed to add an `ErrorGuaranteed` to `Recovered::Yes`. Then I ended up using `Recovered` instead of `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>` for these two places and elsewhere, which required moving `ErrorGuaranteed` from `rustc_parse` to `rustc_ast`.
This makes things more consistent, because `Recovered` is used in more places, and there are fewer uses of `bool` and
`Option<ErrorGuaranteed>`. And safer, because it's difficult/impossible to set `recovered` to `Recovered::Yes` without having emitted an error.
r? `@oli-obk`
The comment mentions that `ReBound` and `ReVar` aren't expected here.
Experimentation with the full test suite indicates this is true, and
that `ReErased` also doesn't occur. So the commit introduces `bug!` for
those cases. (If any of them show up later on, at least we'll have a
test case.)
The commit also remove the first sentence in the comment.
`RePlaceholder` is now handled in the match arm above this comment and
nothing is printed for it, so that sentence is just wrong. Furthermore,
issue #13998 was closed some time ago.
The starting point for this was identical comments on two different
fields, in `ast::VariantData::Struct` and `hir::VariantData::Struct`:
```
// FIXME: investigate making this a `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>`
recovered: bool
```
I tried that, and then found that I needed to add an `ErrorGuaranteed`
to `Recovered::Yes`. Then I ended up using `Recovered` instead of
`Option<ErrorGuaranteed>` for these two places and elsewhere, which
required moving `ErrorGuaranteed` from `rustc_parse` to `rustc_ast`.
This makes things more consistent, because `Recovered` is used in more
places, and there are fewer uses of `bool` and
`Option<ErrorGuaranteed>`. And safer, because it's difficult/impossible
to set `recovered` to `Recovered::Yes` without having emitted an error.
Do not add leading asterisk in the `PartialEq`
I think we should address this issue, however I am not exactly sure, if this is the right way to do it. It is related to the #123056.
Imagine the simplified code:
```rust
trait MyTrait {}
impl PartialEq for dyn MyTrait {
fn eq(&self, _other: &Self) -> bool {
true
}
}
#[derive(PartialEq)]
enum Bar {
Foo(Box<dyn MyTrait>),
}
```
On the nightly compiler, the `derive` produces invalid code with the weird error message:
```
error[E0507]: cannot move out of `*__arg1_0` which is behind a shared reference
--> src/main.rs:11:9
|
9 | #[derive(PartialEq)]
| --------- in this derive macro expansion
10 | enum Things {
11 | Foo(Box<dyn MyTrait>),
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ move occurs because `*__arg1_0` has type `Box<dyn MyTrait>`, which does not implement the `Copy` trait
|
= note: this error originates in the derive macro `PartialEq` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
```
It may be related to the perfect derive problem, although requiring the _type_ to be `Copy` seems unfortunate because it is not necessary. Besides, we are adding the extra dereference only for the diagnostics?
Handle field projections like slice indexing in invalid_reference_casting
r? `@Urgau`
I saw the implementation in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124761, and I was wondering if we also need to handle field access. We do. Without this PR, we get this errant diagnostic:
```
error: casting references to a bigger memory layout than the backing allocation is undefined behavior, even if the reference is unused
--> /home/ben/rust/tests/ui/lint/reference_casting.rs:262:18
|
LL | let r = &mut v.0;
| --- backing allocation comes from here
LL | let ptr = r as *mut i32 as *mut Vec3<i32>;
| ------------------------------- casting happend here
LL | unsafe { *ptr = Vec3(0, 0, 0) }
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: casting from `i32` (4 bytes) to `Vec3<i32>` (12 bytes)
```
Fix more ICEs in `diagnostic::on_unimplemented`
There were 8 other calls to `expect_local` left in `on_unimplemented.rs` -- all of which (afaict) could be turned into ICEs.
I would really like to see validation of `on_unimplemented` separated from parsing, so we only emit errors here:
a60f077c38/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/check/check.rs (L836-L839)
...And gracefully fail instead when emitting trait predicate failures, not *ever* even trying to emit an error or a lint. But that's left for a separate PR.
r? `@estebank`
Fix Error Messages for `break` Inside Coroutines
Fixes#124495
Previously, `break` inside `gen` blocks and functions
were incorrectly identified to be enclosed by a closure.
This PR fixes it by displaying an appropriate error message
for async blocks, async closures, async functions, gen blocks,
gen closures, gen functions, async gen blocks, async gen closures
and async gen functions.
Note: gen closure and async gen closure are not supported by the
compiler yet but I have added an error message here assuming that
they might be implemented in the future.
~~Also, fixes grammar in a few places by replacing
`inside of a $coroutine` with `inside a $coroutine`.~~
It's a macro that just creates an enum with a `from_u32` method. It has
two arms. One is unused and the other has a single use.
This commit inlines that single use and removes the whole macro. This
increases readability because we don't have two different macros
interacting (`enum_from_u32` and `language_item_table`).
It provides a way to effectively embed a linked list within an
`IndexVec` and also iterate over that list. It's written in a very
generic way, involving two traits `Links` and `LinkElem`. But the
`Links` trait is only impl'd for `IndexVec` and `&IndexVec`, and the
whole thing is only used in one module within `rustc_borrowck`. So I
think it's over-engineered and hard to read. Plus it has no comments.
This commit removes it, and adds a (non-generic) local iterator for the
use within `rustc_borrowck`. Much simpler.
It is optimized for lists with a single element, avoiding the need for
an allocation in that case. But `SmallVec<[T; 1]>` also avoids the
allocation, and is better in general: more standard, log2 number of
allocations if the list exceeds one item, and a much more capable API.
This commit removes `TinyList` and converts the two uses to
`SmallVec<[T; 1]>`. It also reorders the `use` items in the relevant
file so they are in just two sections (`pub` and non-`pub`), ordered
alphabetically, instead of many sections. (This is a relevant part of
the change because I had to decide where to add a `use` item for
`SmallVec`.)
And move the `repr` line after the `derive` line, where it's harder to
overlook. (I overlooked it initially, and didn't understand how this
type worked.)
Simplify `use crate::rustc_foo::bar` occurrences.
They can just be written as `use rustc_foo::bar`, which is far more standard. (I didn't even know that a `crate::` prefix was valid.)
r? ``@eholk``
Remove braces when fixing a nested use tree into a single item
[Back in 2019](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/56645) I added rustfix support for the `unused_imports` lint, to automatically remove them when running `cargo fix`. For the most part this worked great, but when removing all but one childs of a nested use tree it turned `use foo::{Unused, Used}` into `use foo::{Used}`. This is slightly annoying, because it then requires you to run `rustfmt` to get `use foo::Used`.
This PR automatically removes braces and the surrouding whitespace when all but one child of a nested use tree are unused. To get it done I had to add the span of the nested use tree to the AST, and refactor a bit the code I wrote back then.
A thing I noticed is, there doesn't seem to be any `//@ run-rustfix` test for fixing the `unused_imports` lint. I created a test in `tests/suggestions` (is that the right directory?) that for now tests just what I added in the PR. I can followup in a separate PR to add more tests for fixing `unused_lints`.
This PR is best reviewed commit-by-commit.
Previously, `break` inside `gen` blocks and functions
were incorrectly identified to be enclosed by a closure.
This PR fixes it by displaying an appropriate error message
for async blocks, async closures, async functions, gen blocks,
gen closures, gen functions, async gen blocks, async gen closures
and async gen functions.
Note: gen closure and async gen closure are not supported by the
compiler yet but I have added an error message here assuming that
they might be implemented in the future.
Also, fixes grammar in a few places by replacing
`inside of a $coroutine` with `inside a $coroutine`.
