Instead, when we're collecting opaques for associated items, we choose the right collection mode depending on whether we're collecting for an associated item of a trait impl or not.
This is the short description (`64-bit MinGW (Windows 7+)`) including
the platform requirements.
The reason for doing it like this is that this PR will be quite prone to
conflicts whenever targets get added, so it should be as simple as
possible to get it merged. Future PRs which migrate targets are scoped
to groups of targets, so they will not conflict as they can just touch
these.
This moves some of the information from the rustc book into the
compiler.
It cannot be queried yet, that is future work. It is also future work to
fill out all the descriptions, which will coincide with the work of
moving over existing target docs to the new format.
From `impl Into<DiagnosticMessage>` to `impl Into<Cow<'static, str>>`.
Because these functions don't produce user-facing output and we don't
want their strings to be translated.
interpret/cast: make more matches on FloatTy properly exhaustive
Actually implementing these is pretty trivial (at least once all the scalar methods are added, which happens in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121926), but I'm staying consistent with the other f16/f128 PRs. Also adding adding all the tests to Miri would be quite a lot of work.
There's probably some way to reduce the code duplication here with more use of generics... but that's a future refactor.^^
r? ```@tgross35```
pattern analysis: abort on arity mismatch
This is one more PR replacing panics by `Err()` aborts. I recently audited all the `unwrap()` calls, but I had forgotten about array accesses. (Again [discovered by rust-analyzer](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/issues/16746)).
r? ```@compiler-errors```
Use the correct logic for nested impl trait in assoc types
Previously we accidentally continued with the TAIT visitor, which allowed more than we wanted to.
r? ```@compiler-errors```
Use root obligation on E0277 for some cases
When encountering trait bound errors that satisfy some heuristics that tell us that the relevant trait for the user comes from the root obligation and not the current obligation, we use the root predicate for the main message.
This allows to talk about "X doesn't implement Pattern<'_>" over the most specific case that just happened to fail, like "char doesn't implement Fn(&mut char)" in
`tests/ui/traits/suggest-dereferences/root-obligation.rs`
The heuristics are:
- the type of the leaf predicate is (roughly) the same as the type from the root predicate, as a proxy for "we care about the root"
- the leaf trait and the root trait are different, so as to avoid talking about `&mut T: Trait` and instead remain talking about `T: Trait` instead
- the root trait is not `Unsize`, as to avoid talking about it in `tests/ui/coercion/coerce-issue-49593-box-never.rs`.
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `&char: Pattern<'_>` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/root-obligation.rs:6:38
|
LL | .filter(|c| "aeiou".contains(c))
| -------- ^ the trait `Fn<(char,)>` is not implemented for `&char`, which is required by `&char: Pattern<'_>`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
= note: required for `&char` to implement `FnOnce<(char,)>`
= note: required for `&char` to implement `Pattern<'_>`
note: required by a bound in `core::str::<impl str>::contains`
--> $SRC_DIR/core/src/str/mod.rs:LL:COL
help: consider dereferencing here
|
LL | .filter(|c| "aeiou".contains(*c))
| +
```
Fix#79359, fix#119983, fix#118779, cc #118415 (the suggestion needs to change), cc #121398 (doesn't fix the underlying issue).
Adjust error `yield`/`await` lowering
Adjust the lowering of `yield`/`await` outside of their correct scopes so that we no longer make orpan HIR exprs.
Previously, `yield EXPR` would be lowered directly to `hir::TyKind::Error` (which I'll call `<error>`) which means that `EXPR` was not present in the HIR, but now we lower it to `{ EXPR; <error> }` so that `EXPR` is not orphaned.
Fixes#121096
They are two different ways of creating dummy results, with two
different purposes. Their implementations are separate except for
crates, where `DummyResult` depends on `DummyAstNode`.
This commit removes that dependency, so they are now fully separate. It
also expands the comment on `DummyAstNode`.
Add a scheme for moving away from `extern "rust-intrinsic"` entirely
All `rust-intrinsic`s can become free functions now, either with a fallback body, or with a dummy body and an attribute, requiring backends to actually implement the intrinsic.
This PR demonstrates the dummy-body scheme with the `vtable_size` intrinsic.
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/63585
follow-up to #120500
MCP at https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/720
Rollup of 10 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #120976 (constify a couple thread_local statics)
- #121683 (Fix LVI tests after frame pointers are enabled by default)
- #121703 (Add a way to add constructors for `rustc_type_ir` types)
- #121732 (Improve assert_matches! documentation)
- #121928 (Extract an arguments struct for `Builder::then_else_break`)
- #121939 (Small enhancement to description of From trait)
- #121968 (Don't run test_get_os_named_thread on win7)
- #121969 (`ParseSess` cleanups)
- #121977 (Doc: Fix incorrect reference to integer in Atomic{Ptr,Bool}::as_ptr.)
- #121994 (Update platform-support.md with supported musl version)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Extract an arguments struct for `Builder::then_else_break`
Most of this method's arguments are usually or always forwarded as-is to recursive invocations.
Wrapping them in a dedicated struct allows us to document each struct field, and lets us use struct-update syntax to indicate which arguments are being modified when making a recursive call.
---
While trying to understand the lowering of `if` expressions, I found it difficult to keep track of the half-dozen arguments passed through to every call to `then_else_break`. I tried switching over to an arguments struct, and I found that it really helps to make sense of what each argument does, and how each call is modifying the arguments.
I have some further ideas for how to streamline these recursive calls, but I've kept those out of this PR so that it's a pure refactoring with no behavioural changes.
