Improve invalid_value lint message
The lint now explains which type is involved and why it cannot be initialized this way. It also points at the innermost struct/enum field that has an offending type, if any.
See https://github.com/erlepereira/x11-rs/issues/99#issuecomment-520311911 for how this helps in some real-world code hitting this lint.
resolve: Remove remaining special cases from built-in macros
Edition and definition sites of the macros are now also taken from the `#[rustc_builtin_macro]` definitions in `libcore`.
---
The edition switch may be a breaking change for `Rustc{Encodable,Decodable}` derives if they are used in combination with the unstable crate `serialize` from sysroot like this
```rust
extern crate serialize;
use serialize as rustc_serialize;
#[derive(RustcEncodable)]
struct S;
```
(see the updated `ui-fulldeps` tests).
Revert "Simplify MIR generation for logical ops"
This reverts commit e38e954a0d.
llvm were not able to optimize the code that well with the simplified mir.
Closes: #62993
Suggest using a qualified path in patterns with inconsistent bindings
A program like the following one:
```rust
enum E { A, B, C }
fn f(x: E) -> bool {
match x {
A | B => false,
C => true
}
}
```
is rejected by the compiler due to `E` variant paths not being in scope.
In this case `A`, `B` are resolved as pattern bindings and consequently
the pattern is considered invalid as the inner or-patterns do not bind
to the same set of identifiers.
This is expected but the compiler errors that follow could be surprising
or confusing to some users. This commit adds a help note explaining that
if the user desired to match against variants or consts, they should use
a qualified path. The help note is restricted to cases where the identifier
starts with an upper-case sequence so as to reduce the false negatives.
Since this happens during resolution, there's no clean way to check what
it is the patterns match against. The syntactic criterium, however, is in line
with the convention that's assumed by the `non-camel-case-types` lint.
Fixes#50831.
Update RLS
This update includes the ability to warn on deprecated config keys.
It's important to be able to warn the user whenever they're using
an old configuration rather than giving them a cryptic "unknown
configuration error"
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rls-vscode/issues/639
Since we removed a config value in the current nightly, it'd be
very good if this change can make also make it before cutting the
next release.
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #61969 (Add #[repr(transparent)] for several types)
- #63346 (Lint on some incorrect uses of mem::zeroed / mem::uninitialized)
- #63433 (Miri shouldn't look at types)
- #63440 (rename RUST_CTFE_BACKTRACE to RUSTC_CTFE_BACKTRACE)
- #63441 (Derive Debug for CrateInfo)
- #63442 (Add an example to show how to insert item to a sorted vec)
- #63453 (rustdoc: general cleanup)
- #63464 (Copy ty::Instance instead of passing by reference)
Failed merges:
r? @ghost
Copy ty::Instance instead of passing by reference
ty::Instance is small and Copy, we should not be adding additional
indirection.
Fixes#63409.
r? @eddyb
Add #[repr(transparent)] for several types
In some functions, types mentioned in this PR are transmuted into their inner value.
Example for `PathBuf`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/libstd/path.rs#L1132.
This PR adds `#[repr(transparent)]` to those types, so their correct behavior doesn't depend on compiler details. (As far as I understand, currently that line, converting `PathBuf` to `Vec<u8>`, is UB).
This update includes the ability to warn on deprecated config keys.
It's important to be able to warn the user whenever they're using
an old configuration rather than giving them a cryptic "unknown
configuration error"
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rls-vscode/issues/639
Since we removed a config value in the current nightly, it'd be
very good if this change can make also make it before cutting the
next release.
These impls prevent ergonomic use of the config (e.g., forcing us to use
RefCell) despite all usecases for these structs only using their Display
impls once.
This drops the parking_lot dependency; the ReentrantMutex type appeared
to be unused (at least, no compilation failures occurred).
This is technically a possible change in behavior of its users, as
lock() would wait on other threads releasing their guards, but since we
didn't actually remove any threading or such in this code, it appears
that we never used that behavior (the behavior change is only noticeable
if the type previously was used in two threads, in a single thread
ReentrantMutex is useless).
