Plugin interface cleanup
The first commit performs two uncontroversial cleanups. The second commit removes `#[plugin_registrar]` and instead requires you to export a `__rustc_plugin_registrar` function, this will require a change to servo's script_plugins (cc `@jdm)`
* On suggestions that include deletions, use a diff inspired output format
* When suggesting addition, use `+` as underline
* Color highlight modified span
Various refactorings of the TAIT infrastructure
Before this PR we used to store the opaque type knowledge outside the `InferCtxt`, so it got recomputed on every opaque type instantiation.
I also removed a feature gate check that makes no sense in the planned lazy TAIT resolution scheme
Each commit passes all tests, so this PR is best reviewed commit by commit.
r? `@spastorino`
LLVM codegen: Don't emit zero-sized padding for fields
Currently padding is emitted before fields of a struct and at the end of the struct regardless of the ABI. Even if no padding is required zero-sized padding fields are emitted. This is not useful and - more importantly - it make it impossible to generate the exact vector types that LLVM expects for certain ARM SIMD intrinsics. This change should unblock the implementation of many ARM intrinsics using the `unadjusted` ABI, see https://github.com/rust-lang/stdarch/issues/1143#issuecomment-827404092.
This is a proof of concept only because the field lookup now takes O(number of fields) time compared to O(1) before since it recalculates the mapping at every lookup. I would like to find out how big the performance impact actually is before implementing caching or restricting this behavior to the `unadjusted` ABI.
cc `@SparrowLii` `@bjorn3`
([Discussion on internals](https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/feature-request-add-a-way-in-rustc-for-generating-struct-type-llvm-ir-without-paddings/15007))
typeck: don't suggest inaccessible fields in struct literals and suggest ignoring inaccessible fields in struct patterns
Fixes#87872.
This PR adjusts the missing field diagnostic logic in typeck so that when any of the missing fields in a struct literal or pattern is inaccessible then the error is less confusing, even if some of the missing fields are accessible.
See also #76524.
correctly handle enum variants in `opt_const_param_of`
Fixes#87542
`opt_const_param_of` was returning `None` for args on an enum variant `Enum::Variant::<10>` because we called `generics_of` on the enum variant which has no generics.
r? `@oli-obk`
* This commit adds the aarch64-unknown-uefi target and also adds it into
the supported targets list under the tier-3 target table.
* Uses the small code model by default
Signed-off-by: Andy-Python-Programmer <andypythonappdeveloper@gmail.com>
Fix feature gate checking of static-nobundle and native_link_modifiers
Feature native_link_modifiers_bundle don't need feature static-nobundle
to work.
Also check the feature gates when using native_link_modifiers from command line options. Current nighly compiler don't check those feature gate.
```
> touch lib.rs
> rustc +nightly lib.rs -L /usr/lib -l static:+bundle=dl --crate-type=rlib
> rustc +nightly lib.rs -L /usr/lib -l dylib:+as-needed=dl --crate-type=dylib -Ctarget-feature=-crt-static
> rustc +nightly lib.rs -L /usr/lib -l static:-bundle=dl --crate-type=rlib
error[E0658]: kind="static-nobundle" is unstable
|
= note: see issue #37403 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/37403> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(static_nobundle)]` to the crate attributes to enable
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0658`.
```
First found this in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/85600#discussion_r676612655
Simplify typeck/primary_body_of, fix comment to match return signature
Hi, new contributor here! I'm carefully reading through the various modules just to learn. I noticed this function, `primary_body_of`, which has gone through a couple of refactors over time, adding new `Option`s to its returned tuple. Observations:
1. the `fn`'s documentation was not all up to date with the the current return signature.
2. `FnHeader` and `FnDecl` are always both `Some` or `None`. So I figured it might just return a reference to the full `hir::FnSig`, for simplicity and more precise typing. It's a pure refactor.
I'm learning better by working with code than just reading it, so here goes! If you want to avoid pure refactor PRs that don't really fix anything, I can revert the code change to only update the comment instead.
encode `generics_of` for fields and ty params
Fixes#87674Fixes#87603
ICE was caused by calling `generics_of` on a `DefId` without any `generics_of` results. This was happening when we call `generics_of` on parent `DefId`s of an unevaluated const when we evaluate it.
r? `@lcnr`
PassWrapper: handle move of OptimizationLevel class out of PassBuilder
This is the first build break of the LLVM 14 cycle, and was caused by
https://reviews.llvm.org/D107025. Mercifully an easy fix.
Move naked function ABI check to its own lint
This check was previously categorized under the lint named
`UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`. That lint is future incompatible and will
be turned into an error in a future release. However, as defined in the
Constrained Naked Functions RFC, this check should only be a warning.
This is because it is possible for a naked function to be implemented in
such a way that it does not break even the undefined ABI. For example, a
`jmp` to a `const`.
Therefore, this patch defines a new lint named
`UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI` which contains just this single check.
Unlike `UNSUPPORTED_NAKED_FUNCTIONS`, `UNDEFINED_NAKED_FUNCTION_ABI`
will not be converted to an error in the future.
rust-lang/rfcs#2774rust-lang/rfcs#2972
Prepare call/invoke for opaque pointers
Rather than relying on `getPointerElementType()` from LLVM function
pointers, we now pass the function type explicitly when building `call`
or `invoke` instructions.
Hide allocator details from TryReserveError
I think there's [no need for TryReserveError to carry detailed information](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/48043#issuecomment-825139280), but I wouldn't want that issue to delay stabilization of the `try_reserve` feature.
So I'm proposing to stabilize `try_reserve` with a `TryReserveError` as an opaque structure, and if needed, expose error details later.
This PR moves the `enum` to an unstable inner `TryReserveErrorKind` that lives under a separate feature flag. `TryReserveErrorKind` could possibly be left as an implementation detail forever, and the `TryReserveError` get methods such as `allocation_size() -> Option<usize>` or `layout() -> Option<Layout>` instead, or the details could be dropped completely to make try-reserve errors just a unit struct, and thus smaller and cheaper.
Sync rustc_codegen_cranelift
05677b6bd6 removes two assertions that should have been removed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87515. They are no longer correct and trigger while compiling the sysroot.
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` label +A-codegen +A-cranelift +T-compiler
Remove special case for statement `NodeId` assignment
We now let `noop_flat_map_stmt` assign `NodeId`s (via `visit_id`),
just as we do for other AST nodes.
Add hint for unresolved associated trait items if the trait has a single item
This PR introduces a special-cased hint for unresolved trait items paths. It is shown if:
- the path was not resolved to any existing trait item
- and no existing trait item's name was reasonably close with regard to edit distance
- and the trait only has a single item in the corresponding namespace
I didn't know where I should put tests, therefore so far I just managed to bless two existing tests. I would be glad for hints where should tests for a hint like this be created, how should they be named (with reference to the original issue?) and what tests should I create (is it enough to test it just for types? or create separate tests also for functions and constants?).
It could also be turned into a machine applicable suggestion I suppose.
This is my first `rustc` PR, so please go easy on me :)
Fixes: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87638
Fix overflow in rustc happening if the `err_count()` is reduced in a stage.
This can happen if stashed diagnostics are removed or replaced with fewer errors. The semantics stay the same if built without overflow checks. Fixes#84219.
Background: I came across this independently by running `RUSTFLAGS="-C overflow-checks=on" ./x.py test`. Fixing this will allow us to move on and find further overflow errors with testing or fuzzing.
This allows opaque type inference to check for defining uses without having to pass down that def id via function arguments to every method that could possibly cause an opaque type to be compared with a concrete type
