Implement unstable trait impl
This PR allows marking impls of stable trait with stable type as unstable.
## Approach
In std/core, an impl can be marked as unstable by annotating it with ``#[unstable_feature_bound(feat_name)]``. This will add a ``ClauseKind::Unstable_Feature(feat_name)`` to the list of predicates in ``predicates_of`` .
When an unstable impl's function is called, we will first iterate through all the goals in ``param_env`` to check if there is any ``ClauseKind::UnstableFeature(feat_name)`` in ``param_env``.
The existence of ``ClauseKind::Unstable_Feature(feat_name)`` in ``param_env`` means an``#[unstable_feature_bound(feat_name)]`` is present at the call site of the function, so we allow the check to succeed in this case.
If ``ClauseKind::UnstableFeature(feat_name)`` does not exist in ``param_env``, we will still allow the check to succeed for either of the cases below:
1. The feature is enabled through ``#[feature(feat_name)]`` outside of std / core.
2. We are in codegen because we may be monomorphizing a body from an upstream crate which had an unstable feature enabled that the downstream crate do not.
For the rest of the case, it will fail with ambiguity.
## Limitation
In this PR, we do not support:
1. using items that need ``#[unstable_feature_bound]`` within stable APIs
2. annotate main function with ``#[unstable_feature_bound]``
3. annotate ``#[unstable_feature_bound]`` on items other than free function and impl
## Acknowledgement
The design and mentoring are done by `@BoxyUwU`
Port `#[rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_start/end]` to the new attrib…
Ports `rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_start` and `rustc_layout_scalar_valid_range_end` to the new attribute parsing infrastructure for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131229#issuecomment-2971353197
r? `@jdonszelmann`
Port `#[track_caller]` to the new attribute system
r? ``@oli-obk``
depends on https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/142493Closesrust-lang/rust#142783
(didn't add a test for this, this situation should simply never come up again, the code was simply wrong. lmk if I should add it, but it won't test something very useful)
Add `#[loop_match]` for improved DFA codegen
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132306
project goal: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/issues/258
This PR adds the `#[loop_match]` attribute, which aims to improve code generation for state machines. For some (very exciting) benchmarks, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-project-goals/issues/258#issuecomment-2732965199
Currently, a very restricted syntax pattern is accepted. We'd like to get feedback and merge this now before we go too far in a direction that others have concerns with.
## current state
We accept code that looks like this
```rust
#[loop_match]
loop {
state = 'blk: {
match state {
State::A => {
#[const_continue]
break 'blk State::B
}
State::B => { /* ... */ }
/* ... */
}
}
}
```
- a loop should have the same semantics with and without `#[loop_match]`: normal `continue` and `break` continue to work
- `#[const_continue]` is only allowed in loops annotated with `#[loop_match]`
- the loop body needs to have this particular shape (a single assignment to the match scrutinee, with the body a labelled block containing just a match)
## future work
- perform const evaluation on the `break` value
- support more state/scrutinee types
## maybe future work
- allow `continue 'label value` syntax, which `#[const_continue]` could then use.
- allow the match to be on an arbitrary expression (e.g. `State::Initial`)
- attempt to also optimize `break`/`continue` expressions that are not marked with `#[const_continue]`
r? ``@traviscross``
