Unlike the other cases of this lint, there's no simple way to detect if
an old version of the relevant crate (`syn`) is in use. The `actix-web`
crate only depends on `pin-project` v1.0.0, so checking the version of
`actix-web` does not guarantee that a new enough version of
`pin-project` (and therefore `syn`) is in use.
Instead, we rely on the fact that virtually all of the regressed crates
are pinned to a pre-1.0 version of `pin-project`. When this is the case,
bumping the `actix-web` dependency will pull in the *latest* version of
`pin-project`, which has an explicit dependency on a newer v dependency
on a newer version of `syn`.
The lint message tells users to update `actix-web`, since that's what
they're most likely to have control over. We could potentially tell them
to run `cargo update -p syn`, but I think it's more straightforward to
suggest an explicit change to the `Cargo.toml`
The `actori-web` fork had its last commit over a year ago, and appears
to just be a renamed fork of `actix-web`. Therefore, I've removed the
`actori-web` check entirely - any crates that actually get broken can
simply update `syn` themselves.
Allow registering tool lints with `register_tool`
Previously, there was no way to add a custom tool prefix, even if the tool
itself had registered a lint:
```rust
#![feature(register_tool)]
#![register_tool(xyz)]
#![warn(xyz::my_lint)]
```
```
$ rustc unknown-lint.rs --crate-type lib
error[E0710]: an unknown tool name found in scoped lint: `xyz::my_lint`
--> unknown-lint.rs:3:9
|
3 | #![warn(xyz::my_lint)]
| ^^^
```
This allows opting-in to lints from other tools using `register_tool`.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/66079#issuecomment-788589193, ``@chorman0773``
r? ``@petrochenkov``
Extend `proc_macro_back_compat` lint to `procedural-masquerade`
We now lint on *any* use of `procedural-masquerade` crate. While this
crate still exists, its main reverse dependency (`cssparser`) no longer
depends on it. Any crates still depending off should stop doing so, as
it only exists to support very old Rust versions.
If a crate actually needs to support old versions of rustc via
`procedural-masquerade`, then they'll just need to accept the warning
until we remove it entirely (at the same time as the back-compat hack).
The latest version of `procedural-masquerade` does work with the
latest rustc, but trying to check for the version seems like more
trouble than it's worth.
While working on this, I realized that the `proc-macro-hack` check was
never actually doing anything. The corresponding enum variant in
`proc-macro-hack` is named `Value` or `Nested` - it has never been
called `Input`. Due to a strange Crater issue, the Crater run that
tested adding this did *not* end up testing it - some of the crates that
would have failed did not actually have their tests checked, making it
seem as though the `proc-macro-hack` check was working.
The Crater issue is being discussed at
230406661
Despite the `proc-macro-hack` check not actually doing anything, we
haven't gotten any reports from users about their build being broken.
I went ahead and removed it entirely, since it's clear that no one is
being affected by the `proc-macro-hack` regression in practice.
Make source-based code coverage compatible with MIR inlining
When codegenning code coverage use the instance that coverage data was
originally generated for, to ensure basic level of compatibility with
MIR inlining.
Fixes#83061
Emit error when trying to use assembler syntax directives in `asm!`
The `.intel_syntax` and `.att_syntax` assembler directives should not be used, in favor of not specifying a syntax for intel, and in favor of the explicit `att_syntax` option using the inline assembly options.
Closes#79869
ast/hir: Rename field-related structures
I always forget what `ast::Field` and `ast::StructField` mean despite working with AST for long time, so this PR changes the naming to less confusing and more consistent.
- `StructField` -> `FieldDef` ("field definition")
- `Field` -> `ExprField` ("expression field", not "field expression")
- `FieldPat` -> `PatField` ("pattern field", not "field pattern")
Various visiting and other methods working with the fields are renamed correspondingly too.
The second commit reduces the size of `ExprKind` by boxing fields of `ExprKind::Struct` in preparation for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80080.
Don't warn about old rustdoc lint names (temporarily)
Since https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80527, rustdoc users have an unpleasant situation: they can either use the new tool lint names (`rustdoc::non_autolinks`) or they can use the old names (`non_autolinks`). If they use the tool lints, they get a hard error on stable compilers, because rustc rejects all tool names it doesn't recognize (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/66079#issuecomment-788589193). If they use the old name, they get a warning to rename the lint to the new name. The only way to compile without warnings is to add `#[allow(renamed_removed_lints)]`, which defeats the whole point of the change: we *want* people to switch to the new name.
To avoid people silencing the lint and never migrating to the tool lint, this avoids warning about the old name, while still allowing you to use the new name. Once the new `rustdoc` tool name makes it to the stable channel, we can change these lints to warn again.
This adds the new lint functions `register_alias` and `register_ignored` - I didn't see an existing way to do this.
r? `@Manishearth` cc `@rust-lang/rustdoc`
Do not insert impl_trait_in_bindings opaque definitions twice.
The reference to the item already appears inside the `OpaqueDef`. It does not need to be repeated as a statement.
More precise spans for HIR paths
`Ty::assoc_item` is lowered to `<Ty>::assoc_item` in HIR, but `Ty` got span from the whole path.
This PR fixes that, and adjusts some diagnostic code that relied on `Ty` having the whole path span.
This is a pre-requisite for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/82868 (we cannot report suggestions like `Tr::assoc` -> `<dyn Tr>::assoc` with the current imprecise spans).
r? ````@estebank````
Adjust `-Ctarget-cpu=native` handling in cg_llvm
When cg_llvm encounters the `-Ctarget-cpu=native` it computes an
explciit set of features that applies to the target in order to
correctly compile code for the host CPU (because e.g. `skylake` alone is
not sufficient to tell if some of the instructions are available or
not).
However there were a couple of issues with how we did this. Firstly, the
order in which features were overriden wasn't quite right – conceptually
you'd expect `-Ctarget-cpu=native` option to override the features that
are implicitly set by the target definition. However due to how other
`-Ctarget-cpu` values are handled we must adopt the following order
of priority:
* Features from -Ctarget-cpu=*; are overriden by
* Features implied by --target; are overriden by
* Features from -Ctarget-feature; are overriden by
* function specific features.
Another problem was in that the function level `target-features`
attribute would overwrite the entire set of the globally enabled
features, rather than just the features the
`#[target_feature(enable/disable)]` specified. With something like
`-Ctarget-cpu=native` we'd end up in a situation wherein a function
without `#[target_feature(enable)]` annotation would have a broader
set of features compared to a function with one such attribute. This
turned out to be a cause of heavy run-time regressions in some code
using these function-level attributes in conjunction with
`-Ctarget-cpu=native`, for example.
With this PR rustc is more careful about specifying the entire set of
features for functions that use `#[target_feature(enable/disable)]` or
`#[instruction_set]` attributes.
Sadly testing the original reproducer for this behaviour is quite
impossible – we cannot rely on `-Ctarget-cpu=native` to be anything in
particular on developer or CI machines.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/83027 `@BurntSushi`
Implement (but don't use) valtree and refactor in preparation of use
This PR does not cause any functional change. It refactors various things that are needed to make valtrees possible. This refactoring got big enough that I decided I'd want it reviewed as a PR instead of trying to make one huge PR with all the changes.
cc `@rust-lang/wg-const-eval` on the following commits:
* 2027184 implement valtree
* eeecea9 fallible Scalar -> ScalarInt
* 042f663 ScalarInt convenience methods
cc `@eddyb` on ef04a6d
cc `@rust-lang/wg-mir-opt` for cf1700c (`mir::Constant` can now represent either a `ConstValue` or a `ty::Const`, and it is totally possible to have two different representations for the same value)
Previously, there was no way to add a custom tool prefix, even if the tool
itself had registered a lint:
```
#![feature(register_tool)]
#![register_tool(xyz)]
#![warn(xyz::my_lint)]
```
```
$ rustc unknown-lint.rs --crate-type lib
error[E0710]: an unknown tool name found in scoped lint: `xyz::my_lint`
--> unknown-lint.rs:3:9
|
3 | #![warn(xyz::my_lint)]
| ^^^
```
This allows opting-in to lints from other tools using `register_tool`.
As far as I can tell what we've been getting is llvm::MaybeAlign(), so
just use that for now. This is required sometime after
24539f1ef2471d07bd87f833cb0288fc0f251f4b.
This changed in 54fb3ca96e261f7107cb1b5778c34cb0e0808be6 - I'm not
entirely sure it's correct that we're leaving config empty, but the one
case in LLVM that looked similar did that.
When cg_llvm encounters the `-Ctarget-cpu=native` it computes an
explciit set of features that applies to the target in order to
correctly compile code for the host CPU (because e.g. `skylake` alone is
not sufficient to tell if some of the instructions are available or
not).
However there were a couple of issues with how we did this. Firstly, the
order in which features were overriden wasn't quite right – conceptually
you'd expect `-Ctarget-cpu=native` option to override the features that
are implicitly set by the target definition. However due to how other
`-Ctarget-cpu` values are handled we must adopt the following order
of priority:
* Features from -Ctarget-cpu=*; are overriden by
* Features implied by --target; are overriden by
* Features from -Ctarget-feature; are overriden by
* function specific features.
Another problem was in that the function level `target-features`
attribute would overwrite the entire set of the globally enabled
features, rather than just the features the
`#[target_feature(enable/disable)]` specified. With something like
`-Ctarget-cpu=native` we'd end up in a situation wherein a function
without `#[target_feature(enable)]` annotation would have a broader
set of features compared to a function with one such attribute. This
turned out to be a cause of heavy run-time regressions in some code
using these function-level attributes in conjunction with
`-Ctarget-cpu=native`, for example.
With this PR rustc is more careful about specifying the entire set of
features for functions that use `#[target_feature(enable/disable)]` or
`#[instruction_set]` attributes.
Sadly testing the original reproducer for this behaviour is quite
impossible – we cannot rely on `-Ctarget-cpu=native` to be anything in
particular on developer or CI machines.
2229: Handle patterns within closures correctly when `capture_disjoint_fields` is enabled
This PR fixes several issues related to handling patterns within closures when `capture_disjoint_fields` is enabled.
1. Matching is always considered a use of the place, even with `_` patterns
2. Compiler ICE when capturing fields in closures through `let` assignments
To do so, we
- Introduced new Fake Reads
- Delayed use of `Place` in favor of `PlaceBuilder`
- Ensured that `PlaceBuilder` can be resolved before attempting to extract `Place` in any of the pattern matching code
Closes rust-lang/project-rfc-2229/issues/27
Closes rust-lang/project-rfc-2229/issues/24
r? `@nikomatsakis`
