Improve C-variadic error messages: part 2
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44930
a reimplementation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/143546 that builds on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/146165.
This PR
- disallows coroutines (e.g. `async fn`) from having a `...` argument
- disallows associated functions (both in traits and standard impl blocks) from having a `...` argument
- splits up a generic "ill-formed C-variadic function" into specific errors about using an incorrect ABI, not specifying an ABI, or missing the unsafe keyword
C-variadic coroutines probably don't make sense? C-variadic functions are for FFI purposes, combining that with async functions seems weird.
For associated functions, we're just cutting scope. It's probably fine, but it's probably better to explicitly allow it. So for now, at least give a more targeted error message.
Made to be reviewed commit-by-commit.
cc `@workingjubilee`
r? compiler
Strip frontmatter in fewer places
* Stop stripping frontmatter in `proc_macro::Literal::from_str` (RUST-146132)
* Stop stripping frontmatter in expr-ctxt (but not item-ctxt!) `include`s (RUST-145945)
* Stop stripping shebang (!) in `proc_macro::Literal::from_str`
* Not a breaking change because it did compare spans already to ensure there wasn't extra whitespace or comments (`Literal::from_str("#!\n0")` already yields `Err(_)` thankfully!)
* Stop stripping frontmatter+shebang inside some rustdoc code where it doesn't make any observable difference (see self review comments)
* (Stop stripping frontmatter+shebang inside internal test code)
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/145945.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/146132.
r? fee1-dead
Make Barrier RefUnwindSafe again
This commit manually implements `RefUnwindSafe` for `std::sync::Barrier` to fixrust-lang/rust#146087. This is a fix for a regression indroduced by e95db591a4
Minor symbol comment fixes.
- The empty symbol is no longer a keyword.
- I don't think any of the special reserved identifiers are used for error recovery.
r? ```@petrochenkov```
Suggest examples of format specifiers in error messages
Format macro now suggests adding `{}` if no formatting specifiers are present. It also gives an example:
```rust
LL | println!("Hello", "World");
| ------- ^^^^^^^ argument never used
| |
| formatting specifier missing
|
= note: format specifiers use curly braces: `{}`
help: consider adding format specifier
|
LL | println!("Hello{}", "World");
| ++
```
When one or more `{}` are present, it doesn't show 'format specifiers use curly braces: `{}`' and example, just small hint on how many you missing:
```rust
LL | println!("list: {}", 1, 2, 3);
| ---------- ^ ^ argument never used
| | |
| | argument never used
| multiple missing formatting specifiers
|
= help: consider adding 2 format specifiers
```
Original issue: rust-lang/rust#68293
Based on discussion in this PR: rust-lang/rust#76443
Let me know if something is missing
default auto traits: use default supertraits instead of `Self: Trait` bounds on associated items
First commit: the motivation has been discussed [here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/144679).
Second commit: the only new places where new implicit `DefaultAutoTrait` bounds are generated are supertraits and trait object so `?Trait` syntax should be extended to these places only.
r? `@lcnr`
std: make address resolution weirdness local to SGX
Currently, the implementations of `TcpStream::connect` and its cousins take an `io::Result<&SocketAddr>` as argument, which is very weird, as most of them then `?`-try the result immediately to access the actual address. This weirdness is however necessitated by a peculiarity of the SGX networking implementation:
SGX doesn't support DNS resolution but rather accepts hostnames in the same place as socket addresses. So, to make e.g.
```rust
TcpStream::connect("example.com:80")`
```
work, the DNS lookup returns a special error (`NonIpSockAddr`) instead, which contains the hostname being looked up. When `.to_socket_addrs()` fails, the `each_addr` function used to select an address will pass the error to the inner `TcpStream::connect` implementation, which in SGX's case will inspect the error and try recover the hostname from it. If
that succeeds, it continues with the found hostname.
This is pretty obviously a terrible hack and leads to buggy code (for instance, when users use the result of `.to_socket_addrs()` in their own `ToSocketAddrs` implementation to select from a list of possible URLs, the only URL used will be that of the last item tried). Still, without changes to the SGX usercall ABI, it cannot be avoided.
Therefore, this PR aims to minimise the impact of that weirdness and remove it from all non-SGX platforms. The inner `TcpStream::connect`, et al. functions now receive the `ToSocketAddrs` type directly and call `each_addr` (which is moved to `sys::net::connection`) themselves. On SGX, the implementation uses a special `each_addr` which contains the whole pass-hostname-through-error hack.
As well as making the code cleaner, this also opens up the possibility of reusing newly created sockets even if a connection request fails – but I've left that for another PR.
CC `@raoulstrackx`
Trim paths less in MIR dumping
With this PR, the paths MIR dump filters and that are printed at the start of a dump file are no longer trimmed. They don't include the crate that is being compiled, however.
CI: rfl: move job forward to Linux v6.17-rc5 to remove temporary commits
v6.17-rc5 contains the equivalent of the two commits we had here, thus move the Rust for Linux job forward to that so that we don't need the temporary commits anymore.
r? ```@lqd``` ```@Kobzol```
try-job: x86_64-rust-for-linux
```@rustbot``` label A-rust-for-linux
```@bors``` try
Implement `#[rustc_align_static(N)]` on `static`s
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/146177
```rust
#![feature(static_align)]
#[rustc_align_static(64)]
static SO_ALIGNED: u64 = 0;
```
We need a different attribute than `rustc_align` because unstable attributes are tied to their feature (we can't have two unstable features use the same unstable attribute). Otherwise this uses all of the same infrastructure as `#[rustc_align]`.
r? `@traviscross`
We need a different attribute than `rustc_align` because unstable attributes are
tied to their feature (we can't have two unstable features use the same
unstable attribute). Otherwise this uses all of the same infrastructure
as `#[rustc_align]`.
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang/rust#145463 (Reject invalid literal suffixes in tuple indexing, tuple struct indexing, and struct field name position)
- rust-lang/rust#145929 (fix APITIT being treated as a normal generic parameter in suggestions)
- rust-lang/rust#146001 (Update getopts to remove unicode-width dependency)
- rust-lang/rust#146365 (triagebot: warn about #[rustc_intrinsic_const_stable_indirect])
- rust-lang/rust#146366 (add approx_delta to all gamma tests)
- rust-lang/rust#146373 (fix comments about trait solver cycle heads)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Reject invalid literal suffixes in tuple indexing, tuple struct indexing, and struct field name position
Tracking issue: rust-lang/rust#60210
Closes rust-lang/rust#60210
## Summary
Bump the ["suffixes on a tuple index are invalid" non-lint pseudo future-incompatibility warning (#60210)][issue-60210][^non-lint] to a **hard error** across all editions, rejecting the remaining carve outs from accidentally accepted invalid suffixes since Rust **1.27**.
- We accidentally accepted invalid suffixes in tuple indexing positions in Rust **1.27**. Originally reported at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/59418.
- We tried to hard reject all invalid suffixes in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/59421, but unfortunately it turns out there were proc macros accidentally relying on it: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/60138.
- We temporarily accepted `{i,u}{32,size}` in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/60186 (the "*carve outs*") to mitigate *immediate* ecosystem impact, but it came with an FCW warning indicating that we wanted to reject it after a few Rust releases.
- Now (1.89.0) is a few Rust releases later (1.35.0), thus I'm proposing to **also reject the carve outs**.
- `std::mem::offset_of!` stabilized in Rust **1.77.0** happens to use the same "don't expect suffix" code path which has the carve outs, so it also accepted the carve out suffixes. I'm proposing to **reject this case as well**.
## What specifically breaks?
Code that still relied on invalid `{i,u}{32,size}` suffixes being temporarily accepted by rust-lang/rust#60186 as an ecosystem impact mitigation measure (cf. rust-lang/rust#60138). Specifically, the following cases (particularly the construction of these forms in proc macros like reported in rust-lang/rust#60138):
### Position 1: Invalid `{i,u}{32,size}` suffixes in tuple indexing
```rs
fn main() {
let _x = (42,).0invalid; // Already error, already rejected by #59421
let _x = (42,).0i8; // Already error, not one of the #60186 carve outs.
let _x = (42,).0usize; // warning: suffixes on a tuple index are invalid
}
```
### Position 2: Invalid `{i,u}{32,size}` suffixes in tuple struct indexing
```rs
fn main() {
struct X(i32);
let _x = X(42);
let _x = _x.0invalid; // Already error, already rejected by #59421
let _x = _x.0i8; // Already error, not one of the #60186 carve outs.
let _x = _x.0usize; // warning: suffixes on a tuple index are invalid
}
```
### Position 3: Invalid `{i,u}{32,size}` suffixes in numeric struct field names
```rs
fn main() {
struct X(i32, i32, i32);
let _x = X(1, 2, 3);
let _y = X { 0usize: 42, 1: 42, 2: 42 }; // warning: suffixes on a tuple index are invalid
match _x {
X { 0usize: 1, 1: 2, 2: 3 } => todo!(), // warning: suffixes on a tuple index are invalid
_ => {}
}
}
```
### Position 4: Invalid `{i,u}{32,size}` suffixes in `std::mem::offset_of!`
While investigating the warning, unfortunately I noticed `std::mem::offset_of!` also happens to use the "expect no suffix" code path which had the carve outs. So this was accepted since Rust **1.77.0** with the same FCW:
```rs
fn main() {
#[repr(C)]
pub struct Struct<T>(u8, T);
assert_eq!(std::mem::offset_of!(Struct<u32>, 0usize), 0);
//~^ WARN suffixes on a tuple index are invalid
}
```
### The above forms in proc macros
For instance, constructions like (see tracking issue rust-lang/rust#60210):
```rs
let i = 0;
quote! { foo.$i }
```
where the user needs to actually write
```rs
let i = syn::Index::from(0);
quote! { foo.$i }
```
### Crater results
Conducted a crater run (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/145463#issuecomment-3194920383).
- 256af3c72f: genuine regression; "invalid suffix `usize`" in derive macro. Has a ton of other build warnings, last updated 6 years ago.
- Exactly the kind of intended breakage. Minimized down to 256af3c72f/validates_derive/src/lib.rs (L71-L75), where when interpolation uses `quote`'s `ToTokens` on a `usize` index (i.e. on tuple struct `Tup(())`), the generated suffix becomes `.0usize` (cf. Position 2).
- Notified crate author of breakage in https://github.com/AmlingPalantir/r4/issues/1.
- Other failures are unrelated or spurious.
## Review remarks
- Commits 1-3 expands the test coverage to better reflect the current situation before doing any functional changes.
- Commit 4 is an intentional **breaking change**. We bump the non-lint "suffixes on a tuple index are invalid" warning into a hard error. Thus, this will need a crater run and a T-lang FCP.
## Tasks
- [x] Run crater to check if anyone is still relying on this being not a hard error. Determine degree of ecosystem breakage.
- [x] If degree of breakage seems acceptable, draft nomination report for T-lang for FCP.
- [x] Determine hard error on Edition 2024+, or on all editions.
## Accompanying Reference update
- https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1966
[^non-lint]: The FCW was implemented as a *non-lint* warning (meaning it has no associated lint name, and you can't `#![deny(..)]` it) because spans coming from proc macros could not be distinguished from regular field access. This warning was also intentionally impossible to silence. See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/60186#issuecomment-485581694.
[issue-60210]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/60210
