Change the algorithm which determines whether a self lifetime can be
used for return type lifetime elision, such that we consider lifetimes
attached to any reference in the self type, so long as Self can be found
anywhere inside the type of that reference.
Detect when user is trying to create a lending `Iterator` and give a custom explanation
The scope for this diagnostic is to detect lending iterators specifically and it's main goal is to help beginners to understand that what they are trying to implement might not be possible for `Iterator` trait specifically.
I ended up to changing the wording from originally proposed in the ticket because it might be misleading otherwise: `Data` might have a lifetime parameter but it can be unrelated to items user is planning to return.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/125337
Rename HIR `TypeBinding` to `AssocItemConstraint` and related cleanup
Rename `hir::TypeBinding` and `ast::AssocConstraint` to `AssocItemConstraint` and update all items and locals using the old terminology.
Motivation: The terminology *type binding* is extremely outdated. "Type bindings" not only include constraints on associated *types* but also on associated *constants* (feature `associated_const_equality`) and on RPITITs of associated *functions* (feature `return_type_notation`). Hence the word *item* in the new name. Furthermore, the word *binding* commonly refers to a mapping from a binder/identifier to a "value" for some definition of "value". Its use in "type binding" made sense when equality constraints (e.g., `AssocTy = Ty`) were the only kind of associated item constraint. Nowadays however, we also have *associated type bounds* (e.g., `AssocTy: Bound`) for which the term *binding* doesn't make sense.
---
Old terminology (HIR, rustdoc):
```
`TypeBinding`: (associated) type binding
├── `Constraint`: associated type bound
└── `Equality`: (associated) equality constraint (?)
├── `Ty`: (associated) type binding
└── `Const`: associated const equality (constraint)
```
Old terminology (AST, abbrev.):
```
`AssocConstraint`
├── `Bound`
└── `Equality`
├── `Ty`
└── `Const`
```
New terminology (AST, HIR, rustdoc):
```
`AssocItemConstraint`: associated item constraint
├── `Bound`: associated type bound
└── `Equality`: associated item equality constraint OR associated item binding (for short)
├── `Ty`: associated type equality constraint OR associated type binding (for short)
└── `Const`: associated const equality constraint OR associated const binding (for short)
```
r? compiler-errors
Reintroduce name resolution check for trying to access locals from an inline const
fixes#125676
I removed this without replacement in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/124650 without considering the consequences
Silence some resolve errors when there have been glob import errors
When encountering `use foo::*;` where `foo` fails to be found, and we later encounter resolution errors, we silence those later errors.
A single case of the above, for an *existing* import on a big codebase would otherwise have a huge number of knock-down spurious errors.
Ideally, instead of a global flag to silence all subsequent resolve errors, we'd want to introduce an unnameable binding in the appropriate rib as a sentinel when there's a failed glob import, so when we encounter a resolve error we can search for that sentinel and if found, and only then, silence that error. The current approach is just a quick proof of concept to iterate over.
Partially address #96799.
When encountering `use foo::*;` where `foo` fails to be found, and we later
encounter resolution errors, we silence those later errors.
A single case of the above, for an *existing* import on a big codebase would
otherwise have a huge number of knock-down spurious errors.
Ideally, instead of a global flag to silence all subsequent resolve errors,
we'd want to introduce an unameable binding in the appropriate rib as a
sentinel when there's a failed glob import, so when we encounter a resolve
error we can search for that sentinel and if found, and only then, silence
that error. The current approach is just a quick proof of concept to
iterate over.
Partially address #96799.
Expand `for_loops_over_fallibles` lint to lint on fallibles behind references.
Extends the scope of the (warn-by-default) lint `for_loops_over_fallibles` from just `for _ in x` where `x: Option<_>/Result<_, _>` to also cover `x: &(mut) Option<_>/Result<_>`
```rs
fn main() {
// Current lints
for _ in Some(42) {}
for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
// New lints
for _ in &Some(42) {}
for _ in &mut Some(42) {}
for _ in &Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
for _ in &mut Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
// Should not lint
for _ in Some(42).into_iter() {}
for _ in Some(42).iter() {}
for _ in Some(42).iter_mut() {}
for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42).into_iter() {}
for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42).iter() {}
for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42).iter_mut() {}
}
```
<details><summary><code>cargo build</code> diff</summary>
```diff
diff --git a/old.out b/new.out
index 84215aa..ca195a7 100644
--- a/old.out
+++ b/new.out
`@@` -1,33 +1,93 `@@`
warning: for loop over an `Option`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
--> src/main.rs:3:14
|
3 | for _ in Some(42) {}
| ^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `#[warn(for_loops_over_fallibles)]` on by default
help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
|
3 | while let Some(_) = Some(42) {}
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
|
3 | if let Some(_) = Some(42) {}
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
warning: for loop over a `Result`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
--> src/main.rs:4:14
|
4 | for _ in Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
|
4 | while let Ok(_) = Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
|
4 | if let Ok(_) = Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
| ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
-warning: `for-loops-over-fallibles` (bin "for-loops-over-fallibles") generated 2 warnings
- Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.04s
+warning: for loop over a `&Option`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
+ --> src/main.rs:7:14
+ |
+7 | for _ in &Some(42) {}
+ | ^^^^^^^^^
+ |
+help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
+ |
+7 | while let Some(_) = &Some(42) {}
+ | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
+ |
+7 | if let Some(_) = &Some(42) {}
+ | ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+
+warning: for loop over a `&mut Option`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
+ --> src/main.rs:8:14
+ |
+8 | for _ in &mut Some(42) {}
+ | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+ |
+help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
+ |
+8 | while let Some(_) = &mut Some(42) {}
+ | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
+ |
+8 | if let Some(_) = &mut Some(42) {}
+ | ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+
+warning: for loop over a `&Result`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
+ --> src/main.rs:9:14
+ |
+9 | for _ in &Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+ | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+ |
+help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
+ |
+9 | while let Ok(_) = &Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+ | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
+ |
+9 | if let Ok(_) = &Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+ | ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+
+warning: for loop over a `&mut Result`. This is more readably written as an `if let` statement
+ --> src/main.rs:10:14
+ |
+10 | for _ in &mut Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+ | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+ |
+help: to check pattern in a loop use `while let`
+ |
+10 | while let Ok(_) = &mut Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+ | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+help: consider using `if let` to clear intent
+ |
+10 | if let Ok(_) = &mut Ok::<_, i32>(42) {}
+ | ~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
+
+warning: `for-loops-over-fallibles` (bin "for-loops-over-fallibles") generated 6 warnings
+ Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized + debuginfo] target(s) in 0.02s
```
</details>
-----
Question:
* ~~Currently, the article `an` is used for `&Option`, and `&mut Option` in the lint diagnostic, since that's what `Option` uses. Is this okay or should it be changed? (likewise, `a` is used for `&Result` and `&mut Result`)~~ The article `a` is used for `&Option`, `&mut Option`, `&Result`, `&mut Result` and (as before) `Result`. Only `Option` uses `an` (as before).
`@rustbot` label +A-lint
This makes a small change as requested in code review, such that if there's
ambiguity in the self lifetime, we avoid lifetime elision entirely instead of
considering using lifetimes from any of the other parameters.
For example,
impl Something {
fn method(self: &Box<&Self>, something_else: &u32) -> &u32 { ... }
}
in standard Rust would have assumed the return lifetime was that of &Self;
with this PR prior to this commit would have chosen the lifetime of
'something_else', and after this commit would give an error message explaining
that the lifetime is ambiguous.
struct Concrete(u32);
impl Concrete {
fn m(self: &Box<Self>) -> &u32 {
&self.0
}
}
resulted in a confusing error.
impl Concrete {
fn n(self: &Box<&Self>) -> &u32 {
&self.0
}
}
resulted in no error or warning, despite apparent ambiguity over the elided
lifetime.
This commit changes two aspects of the behavior.
Previously, when examining the self type, we considered lifetimes only if they
were immediately adjacent to Self. We now consider lifetimes anywhere in the
self type.
Secondly, if more than one lifetime is discovered in the self type, we
disregard it as a possible lifetime elision candidate.
This is a compatibility break, and in fact has required some changes to tests
which assumed the earlier behavior.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/117715
Translation of the lint message happens when the actual diagnostic is
created, not when the lint is buffered. Generating the message from
BuiltinLintDiag ensures that all required data to construct the message
is preserved in the LintBuffer, eventually allowing the messages to be
moved to fluent.
Remove the `msg` field from BufferedEarlyLint, it is either generated
from the data in the BuiltinLintDiag or stored inside
BuiltinLintDiag::Normal.
Remove braces when fixing a nested use tree into a single item
[Back in 2019](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/56645) I added rustfix support for the `unused_imports` lint, to automatically remove them when running `cargo fix`. For the most part this worked great, but when removing all but one childs of a nested use tree it turned `use foo::{Unused, Used}` into `use foo::{Used}`. This is slightly annoying, because it then requires you to run `rustfmt` to get `use foo::Used`.
This PR automatically removes braces and the surrouding whitespace when all but one child of a nested use tree are unused. To get it done I had to add the span of the nested use tree to the AST, and refactor a bit the code I wrote back then.
A thing I noticed is, there doesn't seem to be any `//@ run-rustfix` test for fixing the `unused_imports` lint. I created a test in `tests/suggestions` (is that the right directory?) that for now tests just what I added in the PR. I can followup in a separate PR to add more tests for fixing `unused_lints`.
This PR is best reviewed commit-by-commit.
Also allow `impl Trait` in delegated functions.
The delegation item will refer to the original opaque type from the callee, fresh opaque type won't be created.
Fix bad span for explicit lifetime suggestions
Fixes#121267
Current explicit lifetime suggestions are not showing correct spans for some lifetimes - e.g. elided lifetime generic parameters;
This should be done correctly regarding elided lifetime kind like the following code
43fdd4916d/compiler/rustc_resolve/src/late/diagnostics.rs (L3015-L3044)
`f16` and `f128` step 3: compiler support & feature gate
Continuation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121841, another portion of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/114607
This PR exposes the new types to the world and adds a feature gate. Marking this as a draft because I need some feedback on where I did the feature gate check. It also does not yet catch type via suffixed literals (so the feature gate test will fail, probably some others too because I haven't belssed).
If there is a better place to check all types after resolution, I can do that. If not, I figure maybe I can add a second gate location in AST when it checks numeric suffixes.
Unfortunately I still don't think there is much testing to be done for correctness (codegen tests or parsed value checks) until we have basic library support. I think that will be the next step.
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116909
r? `@compiler-errors`
cc `@Nilstrieb`
`@rustbot` label +F-f16_and_f128
Includes related tests and documentation pages.
Michael Goulet: Don't issue feature error in resolver for f16/f128
unless finalize
Co-authored-by: Michael Goulet <michael@errs.io>
Add asm goto support to `asm!`
Tracking issue: #119364
This PR implements asm-goto support, using the syntax described in "future possibilities" section of [RFC2873](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2873-inline-asm.html#asm-goto).
Currently I have only implemented the `label` part, not the `fallthrough` part (i.e. fallthrough is implicit). This doesn't reduce the expressive though, since you can use label-break to get arbitrary control flow or simply set a value and rely on jump threading optimisation to get the desired control flow. I can add that later if deemed necessary.
r? ``@Amanieu``
cc ``@ojeda``
