Remove JSBackend from config.toml
JSBackend is implied when building the emscripten backend, and not available for the standard llvm backend. This commit also puts the example config in sync with the defaults in src/bootstrap/native.rs
Make the lifetime parameters of tcx consistent.
I have implemented `codegen_allocator` for my backend, but I've had to make a small change to its signature in `ExtraBackendMethods`. I wonder if this change is justified, or if it is too specific to my use case to be useful to anyone else.
`write_metadata` and `codegen_allocator` are both called from `codegen_crate` (in `librustc_codegen_ssa/base.rs`), and they both receive the same `tcx` as an argument:
c196097e58/src/librustc_codegen_ssa/base.rs (L555-L557)
and:
c196097e58/src/librustc_codegen_ssa/base.rs (L640-L642)
However, `codegen_allocator` accepts a `TyCtxt` with any lifetime parameters (`tcx: TyCtxt<'_, '_, '_>`), while `write_metadata` requires that the `tcx` argument is of type `TyCtxt<'b, 'gcx, 'gcx>`. In my implementation, I've found that it's necessary for `tcx` in `codegen_allocator` to also have the `<'b, 'gcx, 'gcx>` lifetime parameters.
Have I misunderstood the purpose of the parameters of `TyCtxt`? I've read [here](https://rust-lang.github.io/rustc-guide/ty.html) that the last two parameters only need to be distinct if the function needs to be used during type inference, but I don't think that is the case here.
Add an explicit test for issue #50582
This code no longer ICEs, and @yodaldevoid found that it was fixed by
commit fe5710a. While that added a similar test, we can explicitly test
this reproducer too.
Closes#50582.
race condition in thread local storage example
The example had a potential race condition that would still pass the test.
If the thread which was supposed to modify it's own thread local was slower than the instruction to
modify in the main thread, then the test would pass even in case of a failure.
This is would be minor if the child thread was waited for since it check using an `assert_eq` for the
same thing, but vice versa.
However, if the `assert_eq` failed this would trigger a panic, which is not at all caught by the
example since the thread is not waited on.
Signed-off-by: benaryorg <binary@benary.org>
On return type `impl Trait` for block with no expr point at last semi
Partial solution, doesn't actually validate that the last statement in the function body can satisfy the trait bound, but it's a good incremental improvement over the status quo.
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `(): Bar` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/impl-trait-return-trailing-semicolon.rs:3:13
|
LL | fn foo() -> impl Bar {
| ^^^^^^^^ the trait `Bar` is not implemented for `()`
LL | 5;
| - consider removing this semicolon
|
= note: the return type of a function must have a statically known size
```
Partially addresses #54771.
Create a derive macro for HashStable and allow proc macros in rustc
A combination of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/56864 and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/56795. There were complications with using `serde_derive` as rustc doesn't know which crate to use for the host when there is a serde_derive in the sysroot and cargo passes another on the command line built from crates.io.
r? @eddyb (for proc macro changes) @alexcrichton (for rustbuild changes) @michaelwoerister (for the macro itself)
`va_start` and `va_end` must be called to initialize/cleanup the
"spoofed" `VaList` in a Rust defined C-variadic function even if
the `VaList` is not used.
`-Z treat-err-as-bug=0` will cause `rustc` to panic after the first
error is reported. `-Z treat-err-as-bug=2` will cause `rustc` to
panic after 3 errors have been reported.
Add const generics to ty (and transitive dependencies)
Split out from #53645. This work is a collaborative effort with @yodaldevoid.
There are a number of stubs. Some I plan to leave for the next PRs (e.g. `infer` and `rustdoc`). Others I can either fix up in this PR, or as follow ups (which would avoid the time-consuming rebasing).
It was a little hard to split this up, as so much depends on ty and friends. Apologies for the large diff.
r? @eddyb
