Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals`
Closes#131204
`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated
This will end up conflicting with the test in #138293 so whichever doesn't land first will need updating
--
# Stabilization Report
## General design
### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized?
[RFC 3695](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695), none.
### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.
None
### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?
None
## Has a call-for-testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?
Yes; only positive feedback was received.
## Implementation quality
### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)
Implemented in [#131034](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131034).
### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature
- [Basic usage, including `#[cfg()]`, `cfg!()` and `#[cfg_attr()]`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/true-false.rs)
- [`--cfg=true/false` on the command line being accessible via `r#true/r#false`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/raw-true-false.rs)
- [Interaction with the unstable `#[doc(cfg(..))]` feature](6d71251/tests/rustdoc-ui/cfg-boolean-literal.rs)
- [Denying `--check-cfg=cfg(true/false)`](6d71251/tests/ui/check-cfg/invalid-arguments.rs)
- Ensuring `--cfg false` on the command line doesn't change the meaning of `cfg(false)`: `tests/ui/cfg/cmdline-false.rs`
- Ensuring both `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)` on the same item result in it being disabled: `tests/ui/cfg/both-true-false.rs`
### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?
The above mentioned issue; it should not block as it interacts with another unstable feature.
### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there?
None
### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization
- `@clubby789` (RFC)
- `@Urgau` (Implementation in rustc)
### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?
`rustdoc`'s unstable`#[doc(cfg(..)]` has been updated to respect it. `cargo` has been updated with a forward compatibility lint to enable supporting it in cargo once stabilized.
## Type system and execution rules
### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)
A few lines to be added to the reference for configuration predicates, specified in the RFC.
I'm removing empty identifiers everywhere, because in practice they
always mean "no identifier" rather than "empty identifier". (An empty
identifier is impossible.) It's better to use `Option` to mean "no
identifier" because you then can't forget about the "no identifier"
possibility.
Some specifics:
- When testing an attribute for a single name, the commit uses the
`has_name` method.
- When testing an attribute for multiple names, the commit uses the new
`has_any_name` method.
- When using `match` on an attribute, the match arms now have `Some` on
them.
In the tests, we now avoid printing empty identifiers by not printing
the identifier in the `error:` line at all, instead letting the carets
point out the problem.
hygiene: Rename semi-transparent to semi-opaque
"Semi-transparent" is just too damn long for a name, especially when used multiple times on a single line, it bothered me when working on #139083.
An optimist sees a macro as semi-opaque, a pessimist sees it as semi-transparent.
Or is it the other way round?
They are no longer needed.
This does slightly worsen the error message for a single test, but that
test contains code that is so badly broken that I'm not worried about
it.
The existing code produces `Some(kw::Empty)` for these invalid forms:
- a non-name-value, e.g. `#[rustc_allowed_through_unstable_modules]`
- a non-string arg, e.g. `#[rustc_allowed_through_unstable_modules = 3]`
The new code avoids the `kw::Empty` and is a little shorter. It will
produce `None` in those cases, which means E0789 won't be produced if
the `stable` attribute is missing for these invalid forms. This doesn't
matter, because these invalid forms will trigger an "malformed
`rustc_allowed_through_unstable_modules` attribute" anyway.
Add an attribute that makes the spans from a macro edition 2021, and fix pin on edition 2024 with it
Fixes a regression, see issue below. This is a temporary fix, super let is the real solution.
Closes#138596
It's very useful. There are some false positives involving integration
tests in `rustc_pattern_analysis` and `rustc_serialize`. There is also a
false positive involving `rustc_driver_impl`'s
`rustc_randomized_layouts` feature. And I removed a `rustc_span` mention
in a doc comment in `rustc_log` because it wasn't integral to the
comment but caused a dev-dependency.
The idea is to identify cases of symbols/identifiers that are not
expected to be used. There isn't a perfectly sharp line between "dummy"
and "not dummy", but I think it's useful nonetheless.
Revert <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138084> to buy time to
consider options that avoids breaking downstream usages of cargo on
distributed `rustc-src` artifacts, where such cargo invocations fail due
to inability to inherit `lints` from workspace root manifest's
`workspace.lints` (this is only valid for the source rust-lang/rust
workspace, but not really the distributed `rustc-src` artifacts).
This breakage was reported in
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138304>.
This reverts commit 48caf81484, reversing
changes made to c6662879b2.
depend more on attr_data_structures and move find_attr! there
r? ``@oli-obk``
This should be an easy one. It just moves some imports around. This is necessary for other changes that I'm working on not to have import cycles. However, it's an easy one to just merge on its own.
By naming them in `[workspace.lints.rust]` in the top-level
`Cargo.toml`, and then making all `compiler/` crates inherit them with
`[lints] workspace = true`. (I omitted `rustc_codegen_{cranelift,gcc}`,
because they're a bit different.)
The advantages of this over the current approach:
- It uses a standard Cargo feature, rather than special handling in
bootstrap. So, easier to understand, and less likely to get
accidentally broken in the future.
- It works for proc macro crates.
It's a shame it doesn't work for rustc-specific lints, as the comments
explain.
fix usage of ty decl macro fragments in attributes
See the test case. Due to one missing code path (and also the changes in #137517), using $ty or other specific fragments as part of an attr wouldn't work. $tt used to work since it wouldn't be parsed anywhere along the way.
Closes#137662
Note: there was an existing code path involving `Interpolated` in
`MetaItem::from_tokens` that was dead. This commit transfers that to the
new form, but puts an `unreachable!` call inside it.
`rustc_span::symbol` defines some things that are re-exported from
`rustc_span`, such as `Symbol` and `sym`. But it doesn't re-export some
closely related things such as `Ident` and `kw`. So you can do `use
rustc_span::{Symbol, sym}` but you have to do `use
rustc_span::symbol::{Ident, kw}`, which is inconsistent for no good
reason.
This commit re-exports `Ident`, `kw`, and `MacroRulesNormalizedIdent`,
and changes many `rustc_span::symbol::` qualifiers in `compiler/` to
`rustc_span::`. This is a 200+ net line of code reduction, mostly
because many files with two `use rustc_span` items can be reduced to
one.
