Point at types that need to be marked with `#[derive(PartialEq)]`.
We use a visitor to look at a type that isn't structural, looking for all ADTs that don't derive `PartialEq`. These can either be manual `impl PartialEq`s or no `impl` at all, so we differentiate between those two cases to provide more context to the user. We also only point at types and impls from the local crate, otherwise show only a note.
```
error: constant of non-structural type `&[B]` in a pattern
--> $DIR/issue-61188-match-slice-forbidden-without-eq.rs:15:9
|
LL | struct B(i32);
| -------- must be annotated with `#[derive(PartialEq)]` to be usable in patterns
LL |
LL | const A: &[B] = &[];
| ------------- constant defined here
...
LL | A => (),
| ^ constant of non-structural type
|
= note: see https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/marker/trait.StructuralPartialEq.html for details
```
- Point at type that should derive `PartialEq` to be structural.
- Point at manual `impl PartialEq`, explaining that it is not sufficient to be structural.
```
error: constant of non-structural type `MyType` in a pattern
--> $DIR/const-partial_eq-fallback-ice.rs:14:12
|
LL | struct MyType;
| ------------- `MyType` must be annotated with `#[derive(PartialEq)]` to be usable in patterns
...
LL | const CONSTANT: &&MyType = &&MyType;
| ------------------------ constant defined here
...
LL | if let CONSTANT = &&MyType {
| ^^^^^^^^ constant of non-structural type
|
note: the `PartialEq` trait must be derived, manual `impl`s are not sufficient; see https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/marker/trait.StructuralPartialEq.html for details
--> $DIR/const-partial_eq-fallback-ice.rs:5:1
|
LL | impl PartialEq<usize> for MyType {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```
```
error: trait object `dyn Send` cannot be used in patterns
--> $DIR/issue-70972-dyn-trait.rs:6:9
|
LL | const F: &'static dyn Send = &7u32;
| -------------------------- constant defined here
...
LL | F => panic!(),
| ^ trait object can't be used in patterns
```
- Add primary span labels.
- Point at const generic parameter used as pattern.
- Point at statics used as pattern.
- Point at let bindings used in const pattern.
Detect const in pattern with typo
When writing a constant name incorrectly in a pattern, the pattern will be identified as a new binding. We look for consts in the current crate, consts that where imported in the current crate and for local `let` bindings in case someone got them confused with `const`s.
```
error: unreachable pattern
--> $DIR/const-with-typo-in-pattern-binding.rs:30:9
|
LL | GOOOD => {}
| ----- matches any value
LL |
LL | _ => {}
| ^ no value can reach this
|
help: you might have meant to pattern match against the value of similarly named constant `GOOD` instead of introducing a new catch-all binding
|
LL | GOOD => {}
| ~~~~
```
Fix#132582.
Point at `const` definition when used instead of a binding in a `let` statement
Modify `PatKind::InlineConstant` to be `ExpandedConstant` standing in not only for inline `const` blocks but also for `const` items. This allows us to track named `const`s used in patterns when the pattern is a single binding. When we detect that there is a refutable pattern involving a `const` that could have been a binding instead, we point at the `const` item, and suggest renaming. We do this for both `let` bindings and `match` expressions missing a catch-all arm if there's at least one single binding pattern referenced.
After:
```
error[E0005]: refutable pattern in local binding
--> $DIR/bad-pattern.rs:19:13
|
LL | const PAT: u32 = 0;
| -------------- missing patterns are not covered because `PAT` is interpreted as a constant pattern, not a new variable
...
LL | let PAT = v1;
| ^^^ pattern `1_u32..=u32::MAX` not covered
|
= note: `let` bindings require an "irrefutable pattern", like a `struct` or an `enum` with only one variant
= note: for more information, visit https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch18-02-refutability.html
= note: the matched value is of type `u32`
help: introduce a variable instead
|
LL | let PAT_var = v1;
| ~~~~~~~
```
Before:
```
error[E0005]: refutable pattern in local binding
--> $DIR/bad-pattern.rs:19:13
|
LL | let PAT = v1;
| ^^^
| |
| pattern `1_u32..=u32::MAX` not covered
| missing patterns are not covered because `PAT` is interpreted as a constant pattern, not a new variable
| help: introduce a variable instead: `PAT_var`
|
= note: `let` bindings require an "irrefutable pattern", like a `struct` or an `enum` with only one variant
= note: for more information, visit https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch18-02-refutability.html
= note: the matched value is of type `u32`
```
CC #132582.
When writing a constant name incorrectly in a pattern, the pattern will be identified as a new binding. We look for consts in the current crate, consts that where imported in the current crate and for local `let` bindings in case someone got them confused with `const`s.
```
error: unreachable pattern
--> $DIR/const-with-typo-in-pattern-binding.rs:30:9
|
LL | GOOOD => {}
| ----- matches any value
LL |
LL | _ => {}
| ^ no value can reach this
|
help: you might have meant to pattern match against the value of similarly named constant `GOOD` instead of introducing a new catch-all binding
|
LL | GOOD => {}
| ~~~~
```
Fix#132582.
the behavior of the type system not only depends on the current
assumptions, but also the currentnphase of the compiler. This is
mostly necessary as we need to decide whether and how to reveal
opaque types. We track this via the `TypingMode`.
After:
```
error[E0005]: refutable pattern in local binding
--> $DIR/bad-pattern.rs:19:13
|
LL | const PAT: u32 = 0;
| -------------- missing patterns are not covered because `PAT` is interpreted as a constant pattern, not a new variable
...
LL | let PAT = v1;
| ^^^
| |
| pattern `1_u32..=u32::MAX` not covered
| help: introduce a variable instead: `PAT_var`
|
= note: `let` bindings require an "irrefutable pattern", like a `struct` or an `enum` with only one variant
= note: for more information, visit https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch18-02-refutability.html
= note: the matched value is of type `u32`
```
Before:
```
error[E0005]: refutable pattern in local binding
--> $DIR/bad-pattern.rs:19:13
|
LL | let PAT = v1;
| ^^^
| |
| pattern `1_u32..=u32::MAX` not covered
| missing patterns are not covered because `PAT` is interpreted as a constant pattern, not a new variable
| help: introduce a variable instead: `PAT_var`
|
= note: `let` bindings require an "irrefutable pattern", like a `struct` or an `enum` with only one variant
= note: for more information, visit https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch18-02-refutability.html
= note: the matched value is of type `u32`
```
Implement edition 2024 match ergonomics restrictions
This implements the minimalest version of [match ergonomics for edition 2024](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3627-match-ergonomics-2024.html). This minimal version makes it an error to ever reset the default binding mode. The implemented proposal is described precisely [here](https://hackmd.io/zUqs2ISNQ0Wrnxsa9nhD0Q#RFC-3627-nano), where it is called "RFC 3627-nano".
Rules:
- Rule 1C: When the DBM (default binding mode) is not `move` (whether or not behind a reference), writing `mut`, `ref`, or `ref mut` on a binding is an error.
- Rule 2C: Reference patterns can only match against references in the scrutinee when the DBM is `move`.
This minimal version is forward-compatible with the main proposals for match ergonomics 2024: [RFC3627](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3627-match-ergonomics-2024.html) itself, the alternative [rule 4-early variant](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3627-match-ergonomics-2024.html), and [others](https://hackmd.io/zUqs2ISNQ0Wrnxsa9nhD0Q). The idea is to give us more time to iron out a final proposal.
This includes a migration lint that desugars any offending pattern into one that doesn't make use of match ergonomics. Such patterns have identical meaning across editions.
This PR insta-stabilizes the proposed behavior onto edition 2024.
r? `@ghost`
Tracking:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123076
Use `bool` in favor of `Option<()>` for diagnostics
We originally only supported `Option<()>` for optional notes/labels, but we now support `bool`. Let's use that, since it usually leads to more readable code.
I'm not removing the support from the derive macro, though I guess we could error on it... 🤔
Isolate the diagnostic code that expects `thir::Pat` to be printable
Currently, `thir::Pat` implements `fmt::Display` (and `IntoDiagArg`) directly, for use by a few diagnostics.
That makes it tricky to experiment with alternate representations for THIR patterns, because the patterns currently need to be printable on their own. That immediately rules out possibilities like storing subpatterns as a `PatId` index into a central list (instead of the current directly-owned `Box<Pat>`).
This PR therefore takes an incremental step away from that obstacle, by removing `thir::Pat` from diagnostic structs in `rustc_pattern_analysis`, and hiding the pattern-printing process behind a single public `Pat::to_string` method. Doing so makes it easier to identify and update the code that wants to print patterns, and gives a place to pass in additional context in the future if necessary.
---
I'm currently not sure whether switching over to `PatId` is actually desirable or not, but I think this change makes sense on its own merits, by reducing the coupling between `thir::Pat` and the pattern-analysis error types.
Make `std::env::{set_var, remove_var}` unsafe in edition 2024
Allow calling these functions without `unsafe` blocks in editions up until 2021, but don't trigger the `unused_unsafe` lint for `unsafe` blocks containing these functions.
Fixes#27970.
Fixes#90308.
CC #124866.
Turn remaining non-structural-const-in-pattern lints into hard errors
This completes the implementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/120362 by turning our remaining future-compat lints into hard errors: indirect_structural_match and pointer_structural_match.
They have been future-compat lints for a while (indirect_structural_match for many years, pointer_structural_match since Rust 1.75 (released Dec 28, 2023)), and have shown up in dependency breakage reports since Rust 1.78 (just released on May 2, 2024). I don't expect a lot of code will still depend on them, but we will of course do a crater run.
A lot of cleanup is now possible in const_to_pat, but that is deferred to a later PR.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70861
Unfortunately, we can't always offer a machine-applicable suggestion when there are subpatterns from macro expansion.
Co-Authored-By: Guillaume Boisseau <Nadrieril@users.noreply.github.com>
