This also downgrades its applicability to MaybeIncorrect. Its suggestion can result in ill-typed
code when the type parameter it suggests providing a different generic argument for appears
elsewhere in the callee's signature or predicates.
As described here UseOdrIndicator should be disabled on Windows
since link.exe does not support duplicate weak definitions
(https://reviews.llvm.org/D137227).
Co-Authored-By: Bastian Kersting <bkersting@google.com>
[rustdoc] Fix duplicated footnote IDs
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/131901.
Footnote IDs were increased locally (ie, on the docblock) and not globally (ie, on the whole item page).
cc `@aDotInTheVoid`
r? `@notriddle`
compiletest: Add ``exact-llvm-major-version`` directive
Now contributors don't need to use `min-llvm-version: X` + `ignore-llvm-version: X+1 - 99`, so they can simply use `exact-llvm-major-version: X`
To be honest, I didn't find any usages of that hack other than the one mentioned in the issue. ( `tests/codegen/try_question_mark_nop.rs`)
Closes#132348.
rustc-dev-guide PR for `//@ exact-llvm-major-version`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide/pull/2135
r? jieyouxu
rustdoc: Treat declarative macros more like other item kinds
Apparently at some time in the past we were unable to generate an href for the module path inside the visibility of decl macros 2.0 (`pub(in ...)`). As a result of this, a whole separate function was introduced specifically for printing the visibility of decl macros that didn't attempt to generate any links. The description of PR https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/84074 states:
> This fixes the overly-complex invariant mentioned in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/83237#issuecomment-815346570, where the macro source can't have any links in it only because the cache hasn't been populated yet.
I can no longer reproduce the original issue. Reusing the existing visibility rendering logic *seems* to work just fine (I couldn't come up with any counterexamples, though I invite you to prove me wrong).
* Fixes#83000
* Fixes the visibility showing up "twice" in rustdoc-JSON output: Once as the `visibility` field, once baked into the source[^1]
* Fixes `#[doc(hidden)]` not getting rendered on doc(hidden) decl macros 2.0 under `--document-hiden-items` (for decl macros 1.2 the issue remains; I will address this separately when fixing #132304).
---
<details><summary>Outdated Section</summary>
NOTE: The current version of this PR is committing a UI crime, I'd like to receive feedback on that. Maybe you have a satisfactory solution for how to remedy it. Namely, as you know we have two different ways of / modes for highlighting code with color:
1. Only highlighting links / item paths and avoiding to highlight tokens by kind like keywords (to reduce visual noise and maybe also artifact size). Used for item declarations(\*).
2. Highlighting tokens by kind. Used for code blocks written by the user.
(\*): With the notable exception being macro declarations! Well, since this PR reuses the same function for rendering the item visibility (which only makes sense), we have a clash of modes: We now use both ways of highlighting code for decl macros: №1 for the visibility, №2 for the rest. This awkward. See for yourself:
* On master: 
* On this branch: 
</details>
Furthermore, we now no longer syntax-highlight declarative macros (be it `macro_rules!` or `macro`) since that was inconsistent with the way we render all other item kinds. See (collapsed) *Outdated Section* above. See also https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132302#discussion_r1821310783.
| On master | On this branch |
|---|---|
|  |  |
[^1]: E.g., `"visibility":{"restricted":{"parent":1,"path":"::a"}},/*OMITTED*/,"inner":{"macro":"pub(in a) macro by_example_vis_named($foo:expr) {\n ...\n}"}`
CFI: Append debug location to CFI blocks
Currently we're not appending debug locations to the inserted CFI blocks. This shows up in #132615 and #100783. This change fixes that by passing down the debug location to the CFI type-test generation and appending it to the blocks.
Credits also belong to `@jakos-sec` who worked with me on this.
Make precise capturing suggestion machine-applicable only if it has no APITs
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132932
The only case where this suggestion is not machine-applicable is when we suggest turning arg-position impl trait into type parameters, which may expose type parameters that were not turbofishable before.
Proper support for cross-crate recursive const stability checks
~~Stacked on top of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132492; only the last three commits are new.~~
In a crate without `staged_api` but with `-Zforce-unstable-if-unmarked`, we now subject all functions marked with `#[rustc_const_stable_indirect]` to recursive const stability checks. We require an opt-in so that by default, a crate can be built with `-Zforce-unstable-if-unmarked` and use nightly features as usual. This property is recorded in the crate metadata so when a `staged_api` crate calls such a function, it sees the `#[rustc_const_stable_indirect]` and allows it to be exposed on stable. This, finally, will let us expose `const fn` from hashbrown on stable.
The second commit makes const stability more like regular stability: via `check_missing_const_stability`, we ensure that all publicly reachable functions have a const stability attribute -- both in `staged_api` crates and `-Zforce-unstable-if-unmarked` crates. To achieve this, we move around the stability computation so that const stability is computed after regular stability is done. This lets us access the final result of the regular stability computation, which we use so that `const fn` can inherit the regular stability (but only if that is "unstable"). Fortunately, this lets us get rid of an `Option` in `ConstStability`.
This is the last PR that I have planned in this series.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Make sure to ignore elided lifetimes when pointing at args for fulfillment errors
See the comment I left in the code.
---
If we have something like:
```
fn foo<'a, T: 'a + BoundThatIsNotSatisfied>() {}
```
And the user turbofishes just the type args:
```
foo::<()>();
```
Then if we try pointing at `()` (i.e. the type argument for `T`), we don't actually consider the possibility that the lifetimes may have been left out of the turbofish. We try indexing incorrectly into the HIR args, and bail on the suggestion.
Consolidate type system const evaluation under `traits::evaluate_const`
Part of #130704Fixes#128232Fixes#118545
Removes `ty::Const::{normalize_internal, eval_valtree}` and `InferCtxt::(try_)const_eval_resolve`, consolidating the associated logic into `evaluate_const` in `rustc_trait_selection`. This results in an API for `ty::Const` that is free of any normalization/evaluation functions that would be incorrect to use under `min_generic_const_args`/`associated_const_equality`/`generic_const_exprs` or, more generally, that would be incorrect to use in the presence of generic type system constants.
Moving this logic to `rustc_trait_selection` and out of `rustc_middle` is also a pre-requisite for ensuring that we do not evaluate constants whose where clauses do not hold.
From this point it should be relatively simple (hah) to implement more complex normalization of type system constants such as: checking wf'ness before invoking CTFE machinery, or being able to normalize const aliases that still refer to generic parameters.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Feature gate yield expressions not in 2024
This changes it so that yield expressions are no longer allowed in the 2024 edition without a feature gate. We are currently only reserving the `gen` keyword in the 2024 edition, and not allowing anything else to be implicitly enabled by the edition.
In practice this doesn't have a significant difference since yield expressions can't really be used outside of coroutines or gen blocks, which have their own feature gates. However, it does affect what is accepted pre-expansion, and I would feel more comfortable not allowing yield expressions.
I believe the stabilization process for gen blocks or coroutines will not need to check the edition here, so this shouldn't ever be needed.
Remove attributes from generics in built-in derive macros
Related issue #132561
Removes all attributes from generics in the expanded implementations of built-in derive macros.
Make sure that we suggest turbofishing the right type arg for never suggestion
I had a bug where rust would suggest the wrong arg to turbofish `()` if there were any early-bound lifetimes...
r? WaffleLapkin
Don't use `maybe_unwrap_block` when checking for macro calls in a block expr
Fixes#131915
Using `maybe_unwrap_block` to determine if we are looking at a `{ mac_call!{} }` will fail sometimes as `mac_call!{}` could be a `StmtKind::MacCall` not a `StmtKind::Expr`. This caused the def collector to think that `{ mac_call!{} }` was a non-trivial const argument and create a definition for it even though it should not.
r? `@compiler-errors` cc `@camelid`
Provide placeholder generics for traits in "no method found for type parameter" suggestions
In the diagnostics for the error ``no method named `method` found for type parameter `T` in the current scope [E0599]``, the compiler will suggest adding bounds on `T` for traits that define a method named `method`. However, these suggestions didn't include any generic arguments, so applying them would result in a `missing generics for trait` or `missing lifetime specifier` error. This PR adds placeholder arguments to the suggestion in such cases. Specifically, I tried to base the placeholders off of what's done in suggestions for when generics are missing or too few are provided:
- The placeholder for a parameter without a default is the name of the parameter.
- Placeholders are not provided for parameters with defaults.
Placeholder arguments are enclosed in `/*` and `*/`, and the applicability of the suggestion is downgraded to `Applicability::HasPlaceholders` if any placeholders are provided.
Fixes#132407
Add a default implementation for CodegenBackend::link
As a side effect this should add raw-dylib support to cg_gcc as the default ArchiveBuilderBuilder that is used implements create_dll_import_lib. I haven't tested if the raw-dylib support actually works however.
Ensure that tail expr receive lifetime extension
cc `@jieyouxu` `@traviscross`
It just came to me that we should add a test to make sure that we honor the contract from the temporary lifetime rule #121346. We should continue to implement this rule in Edition 2021 onward and shorter tail expression lifetime should not override it.
This is a small PR to improve our assurance and establish a stronger contract.
Tracked by rust-lang/rust#123739
