Implement negative bounds for internal testing purposes
Implements partial support the `!` negative polarity on trait bounds. This is incomplete, but should allow us to at least be able to play with the feature.
Not even gonna consider them as a public-facing feature, but I'm implementing them because would've been nice to have in UI tests, for example in #110671.
Currently a `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage` can be created from any type that
impls `Into<String>`. That includes `&str`, `String`, and `Cow<'static,
str>`, which are reasonable. It also includes `&String`, which is pretty
weird, and results in many places making unnecessary allocations for
patterns like this:
```
self.fatal(&format!(...))
```
This creates a string with `format!`, takes a reference, passes the
reference to `fatal`, which does an `into()`, which clones the
reference, doing a second allocation. Two allocations for a single
string, bleh.
This commit changes the `From` impls so that you can only create a
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage` from `&str`, `String`, or `Cow<'static,
str>`. This requires changing all the places that currently create one
from a `&String`. Most of these are of the `&format!(...)` form
described above; each one removes an unnecessary static `&`, plus an
allocation when executed. There are also a few places where the existing
use of `&String` was more reasonable; these now just use `clone()` at
the call site.
As well as making the code nicer and more efficient, this is a step
towards possibly using `Cow<'static, str>` in
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage::{Str,Eager}`. That would require changing
the `From<&'a str>` impls to `From<&'static str>`, which is doable, but
I'm not yet sure if it's worthwhile.
My type ascription
Oh rip it out
Ah
If you think we live too much then
You can sacrifice diagnostics
Don't mix your garbage
Into my syntax
So many weird hacks keep diagnostics alive
Yet I don't even step outside
So many bad diagnostics keep tyasc alive
Yet tyasc doesn't even bother to survive!
This resolves an inconsistency in naming style for functions
on the parser, between functions parsing specific kinds of items
and those for expressions, favoring the parse_item_[sth] style
used by functions for items. There are multiple advantages
of that style:
* functions of both categories are collected in the same place
in the rustdoc output.
* it helps with autocompletion, as you can narrow down your
search for a function to those about expressions.
* it mirrors rust's path syntax where less specific things
come first, then it gets more specific, i.e.
std::collections::hash_map::Entry
The disadvantage is that it doesn't "read like a sentence"
any more, but I think the advantages weigh more greatly.
This change was mostly application of this command:
sed -i -E 's/(fn |\.)parse_([[:alnum:]_]+)_expr/\1parse_expr_\2/' compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/*.rs
Plus very minor fixes outside of rustc_parse, and an invocation
of x fmt.
Instead of loading the Fluent resources for every crate in
`rustc_error_messages`, each crate generates typed identifiers for its
own diagnostics and creates a static which are pulled together in the
`rustc_driver` crate and provided to the diagnostic emitter.
Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
Suggest fix for misplaced generic params on fn item #103366fixes#103366
This still has some work to go, but works for 2/3 of the initial base cases described in #1033366
simple fn:
```
error: expected identifier, found `<`
--> shreys/test_1.rs:1:3
|
1 | fn<T> id(x: T) -> T { x }
| ^ expected identifier
|
help: help: place the generic parameter list after the function name:
|
1 | fn id<T>(x: T) -> T { x }
| ~~~~
```
Complicated bounds
```
error: expected identifier, found `<`
--> spanishpear/test_2.rs:1:3
|
1 | fn<'a, B: 'a + std::ops::Add<Output = u32>> f(_x: B) { }
| ^ expected identifier
|
help: help: place the generic parameter list after the function name:
|
1 | fn f<'a, B: 'a + std::ops::Add<Output = u32>>(_x: B) { }
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
```
Opening a draft PR for comments on approach, particularly I have the following questions:
- [x] Is it okay to be using `err.span_suggestion` over struct derives? I struggled to get the initial implementation (particularly the correct suggestion message) on struct derives, although I think given what I've learned since starting, I could attempt re-doing it with that approach.
- [x] in the case where the snippet cannot be obtained from a span, is the `help` but no suggestion okay? I think yes (also, when does this case occur?)
- [x] are there any red flags for the generalisation of this work for relevant item kinds (i.e. `struct`, `enum`, `trait`, and `union`). My basic testing indicates it does work for those types except the help tip is currently hardcoded to `after the function name` - which should change dependent on the item.
- [x] I am planning to not show the suggestion if there is already a `<` after the item identifier, (i.e. if there are already generics, as after a function name per the original issue). Any major objections?
- [x] Is the style of error okay? I wasn't sure if there was a way to make it display nicer, or if thats handled by span_suggestion
These aren't blocking questions, and I will keep working on:
- check if there is a `<` after the ident (and if so, not showing the suggestion)
- generalize the help message
- figuring out how to write/run/etc ui tests (including reading the docs for them)
- logic cleanups
Revert "review comment: Remove AST AnonTy"
This reverts commit 020cca8d36.
Revert "Ensure macros are not affected"
This reverts commit 12d18e4031.
Revert "Emit fewer errors on patterns with possible type ascription"
This reverts commit c847a01a3b.
Revert "Teach parser to understand fake anonymous enum syntax"
This reverts commit 2d82420665.
Recover from more const arguments that are not wrapped in curly braces
Recover from some array, borrow, tuple & arithmetic expressions in const argument positions that lack curly braces and provide a suggestion to fix the issue continuing where #92884 left off. Examples of such expressions: `[]`, `[0]`, `[1, 2]`, `[0; 0xff]`, `&9`, `("", 0)` and `(1 + 2) * 3` (we previously did not recover from them).
I am not entirely happy with my current solution because the code that recovers from `[0]` (coinciding with a malformed slice type) and `[0; 0]` (coinciding with a malformed array type) is quite fragile as the aforementioned snippets are actually successfully parsed as types by `parse_ty` since it itself already recovers from them (returning `[⟨error⟩]` and `[⟨error⟩; 0]` respectively) meaning I have to manually look for `TyKind::Err`s and construct a separate diagnostic for the suggestion to attach to (thereby emitting two diagnostics in total).
Fixes#81698.
`@rustbot` label A-diagnostics
r? diagnostics
--wip-- [skip ci]
get the generic text and put it int he suggestion, but suggestion not working on derive subdiagnostic
refactor away from derives and use span_suggestion() instead. Show's the correct(?) generic contents, but overwrites the fn name :(
x fmt
drop commented code and s/todo/fixme
get the correct diagnostic for functions, at least
x fmt
remove some debugs
remove format
remove debugs
remove useless change
remove useless change
remove legacy approach
correct lookahead + error message contains the ident name
fmt
refactor code
tests
add tests
remoev debug
remove comment
