The Generics now contain one Vec of an enum for the generic parameters,
rather than two separate Vec's for lifetime and type parameters.
Additionally, places that previously used Vec<LifetimeDef> now use
Vec<GenericParam> instead.
This commit adds a new field to the `Item` AST node in libsyntax to optionally
contain the original token stream that the item itself was parsed from. This is
currently `None` everywhere but is intended for use later with procedural
macros.
This change allows the user to add an `#[allow_fail]` attribute to
tests that will cause the test to compile & run, but if the test fails
it will not cause the entire test run to fail. The test output will
show the failure, but in yellow instead of red, and also indicate that
it was an allowed failure.
Most of the Rust community agrees that the vec! macro is clearer when
called using square brackets [] instead of regular brackets (). Most of
these ocurrences are from before macros allowed using different types of
brackets.
There is one left unchanged in a pretty-print test, as the pretty
printer still wants it to have regular brackets.
This applies the HIR changes from the previous commits to the AST, and
is thus a syntax-[breaking-change]
Renames `PatKind::Vec` to `PatKind::Slice`, since these are called slice
patterns, not vec patterns. Renames `TyKind::Vec`, which represents the
type `[T]`, to `TyKind::Slice`. Renames `TyKind::FixedLengthVec` to
`TyKind::Array`.
Simplify librustc_errors
This is part 2 of the error crate refactor, starting with #34403.
In this refactor, I focused on slimming down the error crate to fewer moving parts. As such, I've removed quite a few parts and replaced the with simpler, straight-line code. Specifically, this PR:
* Removes BasicEmitter
* Remove emit from emitter, leaving emit_struct
* Renames emit_struct to emit
* Removes CoreEmitter and focuses on a single Emitter
* Implements the latest changes to error format RFC (#1644)
* Removes (now-unused) code in emitter.rs and snippet.rs
* Moves more tests to the UI tester, removing some duplicate tests in the process
There is probably more that could be done with some additional refactoring, but this felt like it was getting to a good state.
r? @alexcrichton cc: @Manishearth (as there may be breaking changes in stuff I removed/changed)
