This change adds pre-setup instructions that outline how x.py requires
python to be setup and how to work around the problem of x.py failing to
locate python, especially now that Ubuntu 20.04's dropped default python
command is causing people to encounter this issue regularly.
See also: #71818
# Stabilization report
## Summary
This stabilizes using macro expansion in key-value attributes, like so:
```rust
#[doc = include_str!("my_doc.md")]
struct S;
#[path = concat!(env!("OUT_DIR"), "/generated.rs")]
mod m;
```
See the changes to the reference for details on what macros are allowed;
see Petrochenkov's excellent blog post [on internals](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/macro-expansion-points-in-attributes/11455)
for alternatives that were considered and rejected ("why accept no more
and no less?")
This has been available on nightly since 1.50 with no major issues.
## Notes
### Accepted syntax
The parser accepts arbitrary Rust expressions in this position, but any expression other than a macro invocation will ultimately lead to an error because it is not expected by the built-in expression forms (e.g., `#[doc]`). Note that decorators and the like may be able to observe other expression forms.
### Expansion ordering
Expansion of macro expressions in "inert" attributes occurs after decorators have executed, analogously to macro expressions appearing in the function body or other parts of decorator input.
There is currently no way for decorators to accept macros in key-value position if macro expansion must be performed before the decorator executes (if the macro can simply be copied into the output for later expansion, that can work).
## Test cases
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/ui/attributes/key-value-expansion-on-mac.rs
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/src/test/rustdoc/external-doc.rs
The feature has also been dogfooded extensively in the compiler and
standard library:
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83329
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83230
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/82641
- https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80534
## Implementation history
- Initial proposal: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/55414#issuecomment-554005412
- Experiment to see how much code it would break: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/67121
- Preliminary work to restrict expansion that would conflict with this
feature: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/77271
- Initial implementation: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/78837
- Fix for an ICE: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80563
## Unresolved Questions
~~https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83366#issuecomment-805180738 listed some concerns, but they have been resolved as of this final report.~~
## Additional Information
There are two workarounds that have a similar effect for `#[doc]`
attributes on nightly. One is to emulate this behavior by using a limited version of this feature that was stabilized for historical reasons:
```rust
macro_rules! forward_inner_docs {
($e:expr => $i:item) => {
#[doc = $e]
$i
};
}
forward_inner_docs!(include_str!("lib.rs") => struct S {});
```
This also works for other attributes (like `#[path = concat!(...)]`).
The other is to use `doc(include)`:
```rust
#![feature(external_doc)]
#[doc(include = "lib.rs")]
struct S {}
```
The first works, but is non-trivial for people to discover, and
difficult to read and maintain. The second is a strange special-case for
a particular use of the macro. This generalizes it to work for any use
case, not just including files.
I plan to remove `doc(include)` when this is stabilized. The
`forward_inner_docs` workaround will still compile without warnings, but
I expect it to be used less once it's no longer necessary.
Previously, setting `download-ci-llvm = true` when cmake wasn't
installed would give the following error:
```
failed to execute command: "cmake" "--help"
error: The system cannot find the file specified. (os error 2)
```
This adds a new lint to `rustc` that is used in rustdoc when a code
block is empty or cannot be parsed as valid Rust code.
Previously this was unconditionally a warning. As such some
documentation comments were (unknowingly) abusing this to pass despite
the `-Dwarnings` used when compiling `rustc`, this should not be the
case anymore.
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #85087 (`eval_fn_call`: check the ABI of `body.source`)
- #85302 (Expand WASI abbreviation in docs)
- #85355 (More tests for issue-85255)
- #85367 (Fix invalid input:disabled CSS selector)
- #85374 (mark internal inplace_iteration traits as hidden)
- #85408 (remove size field from Allocation)
- #85409 (Simplify `cfg(any(unix, target_os="redox"))` in example to just `cfg(unix)`)
- #85412 (remove some functions that were only used by Miri)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Simplify `cfg(any(unix, target_os="redox"))` in example to just `cfg(unix)`
Update example for `OsString` that handled `redox` seperately from `unix`: Redox has been completely integrated under `target_family="unix"`, so `cfg(unix)` implies `target_os="redox"`
35dbef2350/compiler/rustc_target/src/spec/redox_base.rs (L26)
Expand WASI abbreviation in docs
I was pretty sure this was related to something for WebAssembly but wasn't 100% sure so I checked but even on these top-level docs I couldn't find the abbreviation expanded. I'm normally used to Rust docs being detailed and explanatory and writing abbreviations like this out in full at least once so I thought it was worth the change. Feel free to close this if it's too much.
Update RLS
Contains https://github.com/rust-lang/rls/pull/1736. With #82208 merged, this should now close https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85225. Tested locally with `./x.py test src/tools/rls` and seems to be working as expected.
I noticed the rustfmt merge didn't trigger toolstate upgrade (because we pruned most but not all of the related machinery?), so I'd rather get this rubber-stamped by someone more knowledgeable with infra/the merged changes in case I missed something and need to include something else here to unbreak the RLS toolstate.
r? `@Mark-Simulacrum`
Parse unnamed fields of struct and union type
Added the `unnamed_fields` feature gate.
This is a prototype of [RFC 2102](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/49804), so any suggestions are greatly appreciated.
r? `@petrochenkov`
Remove CrateNum parameter for queries that only work on local crate
The pervasive `CrateNum` parameter is a remnant of the multi-crate rustc idea.
Using `()` as query key in those cases avoids having to worry about the validity of the query key.
rustc_codegen_ssa: only create backend `BasicBlock`s as-needed.
Instead of creating one backend (e.g. LLVM) block per MIR block ahead of time, and then deleting the ones that weren't visited, this PR moves to creating the blocks as they're needed (either reached via the RPO visit, or used as the target of a branch from a different block).
As deleting a block was the only `unsafe` builder method (generally we only *create* backend objects, not *remove* them), that's gone now and codegen is overall a bit safer.
The only change in output is the order of LLVM blocks (which AFAIK has no semantic meaning, other than the first block being the entry block). This happens because the blocks are now created due to control-flow edges, rather than MIR block order.
I'm making this a standalone PR because I keep getting wild perf results when I change *anything* in codegen, but if you want to read more about my plans in this area, see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/84771#issuecomment-830636256 (and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/84771#issue-628295651 - but that may be a bit outdated).
(You may notice some of the APIs in this PR, like `append_block`, don't help with the future plans - but I didn't want to include the necessary refactors that pass a build around everywhere, in this PR, so it's a small compromise)
r? `@nagisa` `@bjorn3`
Fix unused attributes on macro_rules.
The `unused_attributes` lint wasn't firing on attributes of `macro_rules` definitions. The consequence is that many attributes are silently ignored on `macro_rules`. The reason is that `unused_attributes` is a late-lint pass, and only has access to the HIR, which does not have macro_rules definitions.
My solution here is to change `non_exported_macro_attrs` to be `macro_attrs` (a list of all attributes used for `macro_rules`, instead of just those for `macro_export`), and then to check this list in the `unused_attributes` lint. There are a number of alternate approaches, but this seemed the most reliable and least invasive. I am open to completely different approaches, though.
One concern is that I don't fully understand the implications of extending `non_exported_macro_attrs` to include non-exported macros. That list was originally added in #62042 to handle stability attributes, so I suspect it was just an optimization since that was all that was needed. It was later extended to be included in SVH in #83901. #80641 also added a use to check for `invalid` attributes, which seems a little odd to me (it didn't validate non-exported macros, and seems highly specific).
Overall, there doesn't seem to be a clear story of when `unused_attributes` should be used versus an error like E0518. I considered alternatively using an "allow list" of built-in attributes that can be used on macro_rules (allow, warn, deny, forbid, cfg, cfg_attr, macro_export, deprecated, doc), but I feel like that could be a pain to maintain.
Some built-in attributes already present hard-errors when used with macro_rules. These are each hard-coded in various places:
- `derive`
- `test` and `bench`
- `proc_macro` and `proc_macro_derive`
- `inline`
- `global_allocator`
The primary motivation is that I sometimes see people use `#[macro_use]` in front of `macro_rules`, which indicates there is some confusion out there (evident that there was even a case of it in rustc).
Remove support for floating-point constants in asm!
Floating-point constants aren't very useful anyways and this simplifies
the code since the type check can now be done in typeck.
cc `@rust-lang/wg-inline-asm`
r? `@nagisa`
Reachable statics have reachable initializers
Static initializer can read other statics. Initializers are evaluated at
compile time, and so their content could become inlined into another
crate. Ensure that initializers of reachable statics are also reachable.
Previously, when an item incorrectly considered to be unreachable was
reached from another crate an attempt would be made to codegen it. The
attempt could fail with an ICE (in the case MIR wasn't available to do
so) in some circumstances the attempt could also succeed resulting in
a local codegen of non-local items, including static ones.
Fixes#84455.
