Merge `TraitItem` & `ImplItem into `AssocItem`
In this PR we:
- Merge `{Trait,Impl}Item{Kind?}` into `AssocItem{Kind?}` as discussed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65041#issuecomment-538105286.
- This is done by using the cover grammar of both forms.
- In particular, it requires that we syntactically allow (under `#[cfg(FALSE)]`):
- `default`ness on `trait` items,
- `impl` items without a body / definition (`const`, `type`, and `fn`),
- and associated `type`s in `impl`s with bounds, e.g., `type Foo: Ord;`.
- The syntactic restrictions are replaced by semantic ones in `ast_validation`.
- Move syntactic restrictions around C-variadic parameters from the parser into `ast_validation`:
- `fn`s in all contexts now syntactically allow `...`,
- `...` can occur anywhere in the list syntactically (`fn foo(..., x: usize) {}`),
- and `...` can be the sole parameter (`fn foo(...) {}`.
r? @petrochenkov
Store pointer width as u32 on Config
This removes the dependency on IntTy, UintTy from Session.
It's not obviously a win, but it seems a bit odd to store the AST IntTy/UintTy in Session, rather we store the pointer width as an integer and add normalization methods to IntTy and UintTy.
Use proc-macro to derive HashStable everywhere
Hello,
A second proc-macro is added to derive HashStable for crates librustc depends on.
This proc-macro `HashStable_Generic` (to bikeshed) allows to decouple code and strip much of librustc's boilerplate.
Still, two implementations `Span` and `TokenKind` require to be placed in librustc.
The latter only depends on the `bug` macro. Advise welcome on how to sever that link.
A trait `StableHasingContextLike` has been introduced at each crate root,
in order to handle those implementations which require librustc's very `StableHashingContext`.
This overall effort allowed to remove the `impl_stable_hash_for` macro.
Each commit passes the `x.py check`.
I still have to double check there was no change in the implementation.
*Syntactically* permit visibilities on trait items & enum variants
Fixes#65041
Suppose we have `$vis trait_item` or `$vis enum_variant` and `$vis` is a `:vis` macro fragment. Before this PR, this would fail to parse. This is now instead allowed as per language team consensus in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65041#issuecomment-538105286. (See added tests for elaboration.)
Moreover, we now also permit visibility modifiers on trait items & enum variants *syntactically* but reject them with semantic checks (in `ast_validation`):
```rust
#[cfg(FALSE)]
trait Foo { pub fn bar(); } // OK
#[cfg(FALSE)]
enum E { pub U } // OK
```
Merge repeated definitions
Step forward on #66149
I may need further context to understand the need for a separate crate.
Also, please tell me if you think of other definitions to merge.
