Add a new `mismatched-lifetime-syntaxes` lint
The lang-team [discussed this](https://hackmd.io/nf4ZUYd7Rp6rq-1svJZSaQ) and I attempted to [summarize](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120808#issuecomment-2701863833) their decision. The summary-of-the-summary is:
- Using two different kinds of syntax for elided lifetimes is confusing. In rare cases, it may even [lead to unsound code](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48686)! Some examples:
```rust
// Lint will warn about these
fn(v: ContainsLifetime) -> ContainsLifetime<'_>;
fn(&'static u8) -> &u8;
```
- Matching up references with no lifetime syntax, references with anonymous lifetime syntax, and paths with anonymous lifetime syntax is an exception to the simplest possible rule:
```rust
// Lint will not warn about these
fn(&u8) -> &'_ u8;
fn(&'_ u8) -> &u8;
fn(&u8) -> ContainsLifetime<'_>;
```
- Having a lint for consistent syntax of elided lifetimes will make the [future goal](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/91639) of warning-by-default for paths participating in elision much simpler.
---
This new lint attempts to accomplish the goal of enforcing consistent syntax. In the process, it supersedes and replaces the existing `elided-named-lifetimes` lint, which means it starts out life as warn-by-default.
Fix for async drop inside async gen fn
Return value (for yield) is corrected for async drop inside async gen function.
In CFG, when internal async drop future is polled and returned `Poll<()>::Pending`, then async gen resume function returns `Poll<(OptRet)>::Pending`.
Fixesrust-lang/rust#140530
Async drop - type instead of async drop fn, fixes#140484Fixes: rust-lang/rust#140484Fixes: rust-lang/rust#140500
Fixes ICE, when type is provided in AsyncDrop trait instead of `async fn drop()`.
Fixes ICE, when async drop fn has wrong signature.
Support `opaque_types_defined_by` for `SyntheticCoroutineBody`
We create a synthetic MIR body for the `AsyncFnOnce` impl for async closures. That body goes through all passes that a regular body does, including promotion.
Promotion sometimes requires computing that the type of an rvalue is `Freeze`, which requires computing the typing env of a body. This requires calling `opaque_types_defined_by` on the body's def id, which leads to an ICE today since we don't expect that query to be called for synthetic bodies.
While we could fix this by, for example, computing the typeck root of the body before calling a `TypingEnv` constructor, I think it's appropriate to do a more general fix here since I think it's reasonable that other passes might do analysis too.
Fixesrust-lang/rust#141466
r? ```@lcnr``` or ```@oli-obk```
Do not try to confirm non-dyn compatible method
See the comment I left in `compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/method/confirm.rs`.
If we have a receiver that does not deref to the `dyn Trait` we're assembling the method from, then we used to ICE, but that's something that is possible to encounter with arbitrary self types.
r? oli-obk
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/141419
Async drop poll shim for error dropee generates noop body
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/140930.
When dropee type for async drop poll shim is `ty::Error(_)`, the generated poll function will be noop body. To avoid ICE in `elaborate_drop`.
the size of `AsyncStruct`'s destructor depends on whether the configured
panic strategy is 'unwind' or 'abort' so factor that into the test using
conditional compilation
fixesrust-lang/rust#140939
Do not compute type_of for impl item if impl where clauses are unsatisfied
Consider the following code:
```rust
trait Foo {
fn call(self) -> impl Send;
}
trait Nested {}
impl<T> Foo for T
where
T: Nested,
{
fn call(self) -> impl Sized {
NotSatisfied.call()
}
}
struct NotSatisfied;
impl Foo for NotSatisfied {
fn call(self) -> impl Sized {
todo!()
}
}
```
In `impl Foo for NotSatisfied`, we need to prove that the RPITIT is well formed. This requires proving the item bound `<NotSatisfied as Foo>::RPITIT: Send`. Normalizing `<NotSatisfied as Foo>::RPITIT: Send` assembles two impl candidates, via the `NotSatisfied` impl and the blanket `T` impl. We end up computing the `type_of` for the blanket impl even if `NotSatisfied: Nested` where clause does not hold.
This type_of query ends up needing to prove that its own `impl Sized` RPIT satisfies `Send`, which ends up needing to compute the hidden type of the RPIT, which is equal to the return type of `NotSatisfied.call()`. That ends up in a query cycle, since we subsequently try normalizing that return type via the blanket impl again!
In the old solver, we don't end up computing the `type_of` an impl candidate if its where clauses don't hold, since this select call would fail before confirming the projection candidate:
d7ea436a02/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/project.rs (L882)
This PR makes the new solver more consistent with the old solver by adding a call to `try_evaluate_added_goals` after regstering the impl predicates, which causes us to bail before computing the `type_of` for impls if the impl definitely doesn't apply.
r? lcnr
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/185
Simply try to unpeel AsyncFnKindHelper goal in `emit_specialized_closure_kind_error`
Tweak the handling of `AsyncFnKindHelper` goals in `emit_specialized_closure_kind_error` to not be so special-casey, and just try to unpeel one or two layers of obligation causes to get to their underlying `AsyncFn*` goal.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/140292
Implement `pin!()` using `super let`
Tracking issue for super let: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/139076
This uses `super let` to implement `pin!()`.
This means we can remove [the hack](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138717) we had to put in to fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138596.
It also means we can remove the original hack to make `pin!()` work, which used a questionable public-but-unstable field rather than a proper private field.
While `super let` is still unstable and subject to change, it seems safe to assume that future Rust will always have a way to express `pin!()` in a compatible way, considering `pin!()` is already stable.
It'd help [the experiment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/139076) to have `pin!()` use `super let`, so we can get some more experience with it.
Stabilize `cfg_boolean_literals`
Closes#131204
`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated
This will end up conflicting with the test in #138293 so whichever doesn't land first will need updating
--
# Stabilization Report
## General design
### What is the RFC for this feature and what changes have occurred to the user-facing design since the RFC was finalized?
[RFC 3695](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3695), none.
### What behavior are we committing to that has been controversial? Summarize the major arguments pro/con.
None
### Are there extensions to this feature that remain unstable? How do we know that we are not accidentally committing to those?
None
## Has a call-for-testing period been conducted? If so, what feedback was received?
Yes; only positive feedback was received.
## Implementation quality
### Summarize the major parts of the implementation and provide links into the code (or to PRs)
Implemented in [#131034](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131034).
### Summarize existing test coverage of this feature
- [Basic usage, including `#[cfg()]`, `cfg!()` and `#[cfg_attr()]`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/true-false.rs)
- [`--cfg=true/false` on the command line being accessible via `r#true/r#false`](6d71251cf9/tests/ui/cfg/raw-true-false.rs)
- [Interaction with the unstable `#[doc(cfg(..))]` feature](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/rustdoc-ui/cfg-boolean-literal.rs)
- [Denying `--check-cfg=cfg(true/false)`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/tree/6d71251/tests/ui/check-cfg/invalid-arguments.rs)
- Ensuring `--cfg false` on the command line doesn't change the meaning of `cfg(false)`: `tests/ui/cfg/cmdline-false.rs`
- Ensuring both `cfg(true)` and `cfg(false)` on the same item result in it being disabled: `tests/ui/cfg/both-true-false.rs`
### What outstanding bugs in the issue tracker involve this feature? Are they stabilization-blocking?
The above mentioned issue; it should not block as it interacts with another unstable feature.
### What FIXMEs are still in the code for that feature and why is it ok to leave them there?
None
### Summarize contributors to the feature by name for recognition and assuredness that people involved in the feature agree with stabilization
- `@clubby789` (RFC)
- `@Urgau` (Implementation in rustc)
### Which tools need to be adjusted to support this feature. Has this work been done?
`rustdoc`'s unstable`#[doc(cfg(..)]` has been updated to respect it. `cargo` has been updated with a forward compatibility lint to enable supporting it in cargo once stabilized.
## Type system and execution rules
### What updates are needed to the reference/specification? (link to PRs when they exist)
A few lines to be added to the reference for configuration predicates, specified in the RFC.
compiletest: Make `SUGGESTION` annotations viral
If one of them is expected in a test file, then others should be annotated as well, in the same way as with `HELP`s and `NOTE`s.
This doesn't require much of an additional annotation burden, but simplifies the rules.
r? ```@jieyouxu```
UI tests: add missing diagnostic kinds where possible
The subset of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139427 that only adds diagnostic kinds to line annotations, without changing any other things in annotations or compiletest.
After this only non-viral `NOTE`s and `HELP`s should be missing.
r? `@jieyouxu`
