rustc_errors: let `DiagnosticBuilder::emit` return a "guarantee of emission".
That is, `DiagnosticBuilder` is now generic over the return type of `.emit()`, so we'll now have:
* `DiagnosticBuilder<ErrorReported>` for error (incl. fatal/bug) diagnostics
* can only be created via a `const L: Level`-generic constructor, that limits allowed variants via a `where` clause, so not even `rustc_errors` can accidentally bypass this limitation
* asserts `diagnostic.is_error()` on emission, just in case the construction restriction was bypassed (e.g. by replacing the whole `Diagnostic` inside `DiagnosticBuilder`)
* `.emit()` returns `ErrorReported`, as a "proof" token that `.emit()` was called
(though note that this isn't a real guarantee until after completing the work on
#69426)
* `DiagnosticBuilder<()>` for everything else (warnings, notes, etc.)
* can also be obtained from other `DiagnosticBuilder`s by calling `.forget_guarantee()`
This PR is a companion to other ongoing work, namely:
* #69426
and it's ongoing implementation:
#93222
the API changes in this PR are needed to get statically-checked "only errors produce `ErrorReported` from `.emit()`", but doesn't itself provide any really strong guarantees without those other `ErrorReported` changes
* #93244
would make the choices of API changes (esp. naming) in this PR fit better overall
In order to be able to let `.emit()` return anything trustable, several changes had to be made:
* `Diagnostic`'s `level` field is now private to `rustc_errors`, to disallow arbitrary "downgrade"s from "some kind of error" to "warning" (or anything else that doesn't cause compilation to fail)
* it's still possible to replace the whole `Diagnostic` inside the `DiagnosticBuilder`, sadly, that's harder to fix, but it's unlikely enough that we can paper over it with asserts on `.emit()`
* `.cancel()` now consumes `DiagnosticBuilder`, preventing `.emit()` calls on a cancelled diagnostic
* it's also now done internally, through `DiagnosticBuilder`-private state, instead of having a `Level::Cancelled` variant that can be read (or worse, written) by the user
* this removes a hazard of calling `.cancel()` on an error then continuing to attach details to it, and even expect to be able to `.emit()` it
* warnings were switched to *only* `can_emit_warnings` on emission (instead of pre-cancelling early)
* `struct_dummy` was removed (as it relied on a pre-`Cancelled` `Diagnostic`)
* since `.emit()` doesn't consume the `DiagnosticBuilder` <sub>(I tried and gave up, it's much more work than this PR)</sub>,
we have to make `.emit()` idempotent wrt the guarantees it returns
* thankfully, `err.emit(); err.emit();` can return `ErrorReported` both times, as the second `.emit()` call has no side-effects *only* because the first one did do the appropriate emission
* `&mut Diagnostic` is now used in a lot of function signatures, which used to take `&mut DiagnosticBuilder` (in the interest of not having to make those functions generic)
* the APIs were already mostly identical, allowing for low-effort porting to this new setup
* only some of the suggestion methods needed some rework, to have the extra `DiagnosticBuilder` functionality on the `Diagnostic` methods themselves (that change is also present in #93259)
* `.emit()`/`.cancel()` aren't available, but IMO calling them from an "error decorator/annotator" function isn't a good practice, and can lead to strange behavior (from the caller's perspective)
* `.downgrade_to_delayed_bug()` was added, letting you convert any `.is_error()` diagnostic into a `delay_span_bug` one (which works because in both cases the guarantees available are the same)
This PR should ideally be reviewed commit-by-commit, since there is a lot of fallout in each.
r? `@estebank` cc `@Manishearth` `@nikomatsakis` `@mark-i-m`
Improve `--check-cfg` implementation
This pull-request is a mix of improvements regarding the `--check-cfg` implementation:
- Simpler internal representation (usage of `Option` instead of separate bool)
- Add --check-cfg to the unstable book (based on the RFC)
- Improved diagnostics:
* List possible values when the value is unexpected
* Suggest if possible a name or value that is similar
- Add more tests (well known names, mix of combinations, ...)
r? ```@petrochenkov```
Move ty::print methods to Drop-based scope guards
Primary goal is reducing codegen of the TLS access for each closure, which shaves ~3 seconds of bootstrap time over rustc as a whole.
Specifically, rename the `Const` struct as `ConstS` and re-introduce `Const` as
this:
```
pub struct Const<'tcx>(&'tcx Interned<ConstS>);
```
This now matches `Ty` and `Predicate` more closely, including using
pointer-based `eq` and `hash`.
Notable changes:
- `mk_const` now takes a `ConstS`.
- `Const` was copy, despite being 48 bytes. Now `ConstS` is not, so need a
we need separate arena for it, because we can't use the `Dropless` one any
more.
- Many `&'tcx Const<'tcx>`/`&Const<'tcx>` to `Const<'tcx>` changes
- Many `ct.ty` to `ct.ty()` and `ct.val` to `ct.val()` changes.
- Lots of tedious sigil fiddling.
Add links to the reference and rust by example for asm! docs and lints
These were previously removed in #91728 due to broken links.
cc ``@ehuss`` since this updates the rust-by-example submodule
Use consistent function parameter order for early context construction and early linting
Rename some functions to make it clear that they do not necessarily work on the whole crate
Remove `SymbolStr`
This was originally proposed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/74554#discussion_r466203544. As well as removing the icky `SymbolStr` type, it allows the removal of a lot of `&` and `*` occurrences.
Best reviewed one commit at a time.
r? `@oli-obk`
hir: Do not introduce dummy type names for `extern` blocks in def paths
Use a separate nameless `DefPathData` variant instead.
Extracted from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/91795.
Lint bare traits in AstConv.
Removing the lint from lowering allows to:
- make lowering querification easier;
- have the lint implementation in only one place.
r? `@estebank`
remove a empty line
import `module_to_string`
use `contains("test")`
show a suggestion in case module starts_with/ends_with "test"
replace `parent` with `containing`
They are also removed from the prelude as per the decision in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87228.
stdarch and compiler-builtins are updated to work with the new, stable
asm! and global_asm! macros.
Currently, we parse macros at the end of a block
(e.g. `fn foo() { my_macro!() }`) as expressions, rather than
statements. This means that a macro invoked in this position
cannot expand to items or semicolon-terminated expressions.
In the future, we might want to start parsing these kinds of macros
as statements. This would make expansion more 'token-based'
(i.e. macro expansion behaves (almost) as if you just textually
replaced the macro invocation with its output). However,
this is a breaking change (see PR #78991), so it will require
further discussion.
Since the current behavior will not be changing any time soon,
we need to address the interaction with the
`SEMICOLON_IN_EXPRESSIONS_FROM_MACROS` lint. Since we are parsing
the result of macro expansion as an expression, we will emit a lint
if there's a trailing semicolon in the macro output. However, this
results in a somewhat confusing message for users, since it visually
looks like there should be no problem with having a semicolon
at the end of a block
(e.g. `fn foo() { my_macro!() }` => `fn foo() { produced_expr; }`)
To help reduce confusion, this commit adds a note explaining
that the macro is being interpreted as an expression. Additionally,
we suggest adding a semicolon after the macro *invocation* - this
will cause us to parse the macro call as a statement. We do *not*
use a structured suggestion for this, since the user may actually
want to remove the semicolon from the macro definition (allowing
the block to evaluate to the expression produced by the macro).
Warn on inert attributes used on bang macro invocation
These attributes are currently discarded.
This may change in the future (see #63221), but for now,
placing inert attributes on a macro invocation does nothing,
so we should warn users about it.
Technically, it's possible for there to be attribute macro
on the same macro invocation (or at a higher scope), which
inspects the inert attribute. For example:
```rust
#[look_for_inline_attr]
#[inline]
my_macro!()
#[look_for_nested_inline]
mod foo { #[inline] my_macro!() }
```
However, this would be a very strange thing to do.
Anyone running into this can manually suppress the warning.
