Show `used attribute`'s kind for user when find it isn't applied to a `static` variable.
For example :
```rust
extern "C" {
#[used] //~ ERROR attribute must be applied to a `static` variable
static FOO: i32; // show the kind of this item to help user understand why the error is reported.
}
```
fixes#126789
fix: prefer `(*p).clone` to `p.clone` if the `p` is a raw pointer
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/126863
I wonder if there is a better way to solve the regression problem of this test case:
`tests/ui/borrowck/issue-20801.rs`.
It's okay to drop the dereference symbol in this scenario.
But it's not correct in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/126863
```
help: consider removing the dereference here
|
5 - let inner: String = *p;
5 + let inner: String = p;
```
I haven't found out how to tell if clone pointer is allowed, i.e. no type mismatch occurs
Fix a error suggestion for E0121 when using placeholder _ as return types on function signature.
Recommit after refactoring based on comment:
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/126017#issuecomment-2189149361
But when changing return type's lifetime to `ReError` will affect the subsequent borrow check process and cause test11 in typeck_type_placeholder_item.rs to lost E0515 message.
```rust
fn test11(x: &usize) -> &_ {
//~^ ERROR the placeholder `_` is not allowed within types on item signatures for return types
&x //~ ERROR cannot return reference to function parameter(this E0515 msg will disappear)
}
```
fixes#125488
r? ``@pnkfelix``
Improve unsafe extern blocks diagnostics
Closes#126327
For this code:
```rust
extern {
pub fn foo();
pub safe fn bar();
}
```
We get ...
```
error: items in unadorned `extern` blocks cannot have safety qualifiers
--> test.rs:3:5
|
3 | pub safe fn bar();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
help: add unsafe to this `extern` block
|
1 | unsafe extern {
| ++++++
error[E0658]: `unsafe extern {}` blocks and `safe` keyword are experimental
--> test.rs:3:9
|
3 | pub safe fn bar();
| ^^^^
|
= note: see issue #123743 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123743> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(unsafe_extern_blocks)]` to the crate attributes to enable
error: aborting due to 2 previous errors
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0658`.
```
And then making the extern block unsafe, we get ...
```
error: extern block cannot be declared unsafe
--> test.rs:1:1
|
1 | unsafe extern {
| ^^^^^^
|
= note: see issue #123743 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123743> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(unsafe_extern_blocks)]` to the crate attributes to enable
error: items in unadorned `extern` blocks cannot have safety qualifiers
--> test.rs:3:5
|
3 | pub safe fn bar();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error[E0658]: `unsafe extern {}` blocks and `safe` keyword are experimental
--> test.rs:3:9
|
3 | pub safe fn bar();
| ^^^^
|
= note: see issue #123743 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123743> for more information
= help: add `#![feature(unsafe_extern_blocks)]` to the crate attributes to enable
error: aborting due to 3 previous errors
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0658`.
```
r? ``@compiler-errors``
Add a run-make test that LLD is not being used by default on the x64 beta/stable channel
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/126701 showed that the handling of `lld` in bootstrap is currently not ideal. While it would be nice to refactor it eventually, we should also make sure that we have a test that checks that `lld` is not used (yet!) by default on the x64 Linux stable channel.
CC ``@lqd``
r? ``@onur-ozkan``
Implement `x perf` as a separate tool
Continues work from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/126318, adds a CLI for running `rustc-perf` profiling commands through a new `rustc-perf-wrapper` tool. The CLI is in a separate tool to enable experimentation outside of `bootstrap`.
This is probably most of what we can do so far, I'll add support for benchmarking once `rustc-perf` gets a terminal output for comparing benchmark results.
r? ``@onur-ozkan``
Improve error message in tidy
The old error message was wrong (there is no `venv` Python package on PyPi), and we did not specify the correct Python path in the error message.
Implement new effects desugaring
cc `@rust-lang/project-const-traits.` Will write down notes once I have finished.
* [x] See if we want `T: Tr` to desugar into `T: Tr, T::Effects: Compat<true>`
* [x] Fix ICEs on `type Assoc: ~const Tr` and `type Assoc<T: ~const Tr>`
* [ ] add types and traits to minicore test
* [ ] update rustc-dev-guide
Fixes#119717Fixes#123664Fixes#124857Fixes#126148
Bootstrap: Don't get output if `lldb --version` errors
fixes#126892
`Command` can error in two ways: the OS can fail to run the binary at all or else the binary can return an error exit code. Unfortunately the distinction between the two is not clear cut. The OS may succeed in starting the binary but it may still error before `main` (e.g. if a necessary library fails to load) and this will be reported via the exit code.
Fortunately this case is simpler. We can assume that `lldb --version` will only ever error if there's a startup issue of some kind. so both kinds of errors are caused by the OS. Thus it's safe for us to treat them equally for the sake of this specific check.
docs: say "includes" instead of "does include"
Provides more visual difference between the negative ("does not include") and the positive ("includes"). Both phrases have the same meaning.
Migrate `run-make/override-aliased-flags` to `rmake.rs`
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121876.
I voluntarily didn't use the helper methods to make it obvious what's tested.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Migrate `pdb-alt-path`, `mismatching-target-triples` and `mingw-export-call-convention` `run-make` tests to rmake
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
Needs MSVC try jobs.
try-job: x86_64-mingw
try-job: x86_64-msvc
