Record coroutine kind in coroutine generics
Oops, added a new substitution (the "kind" ty) to coroutines but forgot to record it in the `generics_of`. I'm surprised I left this out of the coroutine-closure PR -- I thought I made this change; I possibly rebased it out by accident.
Fixes#120732
r? oli-obk
Remove some `unchecked_claim_error_was_emitted` calls
We want to drive the number of these calls down as much as possible. This PR gets rid of a bunch of them.
r? ``@oli-obk``
MirPass: make name more const
Continues #120161, this time applied to `MirPass` instead of `MirLint`, locally shaves few (very few) instructions off.
r? ``@cjgillot``
pattern_analysis: gather up place-relevant info
We track 3 things about each place during exhaustiveness: its type, its (data) validity, and whether it's the scrutinee place. This PR gathers all three into a single struct.
r? `````@compiler-errors`````
coverage: Split out counter increment sites from BCB node/edge counters
This makes it possible for two nodes/edges in the coverage graph to share the same counter, without causing the instrumentor to inject unwanted duplicate counter-increment statements.
---
````@rustbot```` label +A-code-coverage
Suggest turning `if let` into irrefutable `let` if appropriate
When encountering an `if let` tail expression without an `else` arm for an enum with a single variant, suggest writing an irrefutable `let` binding instead.
```
error[E0317]: `if` may be missing an `else` clause
--> $DIR/irrefutable-if-let-without-else.rs:8:5
|
LL | fn foo(x: Enum) -> i32 {
| --- expected `i32` because of this return type
LL | / if let Enum::Variant(value) = x {
LL | | value
LL | | }
| |_____^ expected `i32`, found `()`
|
= note: `if` expressions without `else` evaluate to `()`
= help: consider adding an `else` block that evaluates to the expected type
help: consider using an irrefutable `let` binding instead
|
LL ~ let Enum::Variant(value) = x;
LL ~ value
|
```
Fix#61788.
Mark "unused binding" suggestion as maybe incorrect
Ignoring unused bindings should be a determination made by a human, `rustfix` shouldn't auto-apply the suggested change.
Fix#54196.
various const interning cleanups
After #119044 I noticed that some things can be simplified and refactored.
This is also a requirement for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116564 as there we'll need to treat the base allocation differently from the others
r? ````@RalfJung````
- In `emit_producing_error_guaranteed`, only allow `Level::Error`.
- In `emit_diagnostic`, only produce `ErrorGuaranteed` for `Level` and
`DelayedBug`. (Not `Bug` or `Fatal`. They don't need it, because the
relevant `emit` methods abort.)
- Add/update various comments.
When `catch_fatal_errors` catches a `FatalErrorMarker`, it returns an
`ErrorGuaranteed` that is conjured out of thin air with
`unchecked_claim_error_was_emitted`. But that `ErrorGuaranteed` is never
used.
This commit changes it to instead conjure a `FatalError` out of thin
air. (A non-deprecated action!) This makes more sense because
`FatalError` and `FatalErrorMarker` are a natural pairing -- a
`FatalErrorMarker` is created by calling `FatalError::raise`, so this is
effectively getting back the original `FatalError`.
This requires a tiny change in `catch_with_exit_code`. The old result of
the `catch_fatal_errors` call there was
`Result<Result<(), ErrorGuaranteed>, ErrorGuaranteed>` which could be
`flatten`ed into `Result<(), ErrorGuaranteed>`. The new result of the
`catch_fatal_errors` calls is
`Result<Result<(), ErrorGuaranteed>, FatalError>`, which can't be
`flatten`ed but is still easily matched for the success case.
Don't expect early-bound region to be local when reporting errors in RPITIT well-formedness
The implicit lifetime in the example code gets replaced with `ReError`, which fails a `sub_regions` check in the lexical region solver. Error reporting ends up calling `is_suitable_region` on an early bound region in the *trait* definition. This causes an ICE because we `expect_local()`.
This is kind of a bad explanation, but this code just makes diagnostics reporting a bit more gracefully fallible. If the reviewer wants a thorough investigation of exactly where we get this region outlives obligation, I can write one up. Doesn't really seem worth it, though, imo.
Fixes#120638Fixes#120648
Normalize type outlives obligations in NLL for new solver
Normalize the type outlives assumptions and obligations in MIR borrowck. This should fix any of the lazy-norm-related MIR borrowck problems.
Also some cleanups from last PR:
1. Normalize obligations in a loop in lexical region resolution
2. Use `deeply_normalize_with_skipped_universes` in lexical resolution since we may have, e.g. `for<'a> Alias<'a>: 'b`.
r? lcnr
Account for non-overlapping unmet trait bounds in suggestion
When a method not found on a type parameter could have been provided by any
of multiple traits, suggest each trait individually, instead of a single
suggestion to restrict the type parameter with *all* of them.
Before:
```
error[E0599]: the method `cmp` exists for reference `&T`, but its trait bounds were not satisfied
--> $DIR/method-on-unbounded-type-param.rs:5:10
|
LL | (&a).cmp(&b)
| ^^^ method cannot be called on `&T` due to unsatisfied trait bounds
|
= note: the following trait bounds were not satisfied:
`T: Ord`
which is required by `&T: Ord`
`&T: Iterator`
which is required by `&mut &T: Iterator`
`T: Iterator`
which is required by `&mut T: Iterator`
help: consider restricting the type parameters to satisfy the trait bounds
|
LL | fn g<T>(a: T, b: T) -> std::cmp::Ordering where T: Iterator, T: Ord {
| +++++++++++++++++++++++++
```
After:
```
error[E0599]: the method `cmp` exists for reference `&T`, but its trait bounds were not satisfied
--> $DIR/method-on-unbounded-type-param.rs:5:10
|
LL | (&a).cmp(&b)
| ^^^ method cannot be called on `&T` due to unsatisfied trait bounds
|
= note: the following trait bounds were not satisfied:
`T: Ord`
which is required by `&T: Ord`
`&T: Iterator`
which is required by `&mut &T: Iterator`
`T: Iterator`
which is required by `&mut T: Iterator`
= help: items from traits can only be used if the type parameter is bounded by the trait
help: the following traits define an item `cmp`, perhaps you need to restrict type parameter `T` with one of them:
|
LL | fn g<T: Ord>(a: T, b: T) -> std::cmp::Ordering {
| +++++
LL | fn g<T: Iterator>(a: T, b: T) -> std::cmp::Ordering {
| ++++++++++
```
Fix#108428.
Follow up to #120396, only last commit is relevant.
update indirect structural match lints to match RFC and to show up for dependencies
This is a large step towards implementing https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3535.
We currently have five lints related to "the structural match situation":
- nontrivial_structural_match
- indirect_structural_match
- pointer_structural_match
- const_patterns_without_partial_eq
- illegal_floating_point_literal_pattern
This PR concerns the first 3 of them. (The 4th already is set up to show for dependencies, and the 5th is removed by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116284.) nontrivial_structural_match is being removed as per the RFC; the other two are enabled to show up in dependencies.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/73448 by removing the affected analysis.
Account for unbounded type param receiver in suggestions
When encountering
```rust
fn f<T>(a: T, b: T) -> std::cmp::Ordering {
a.cmp(&b) //~ ERROR E0599
}
```
output
```
error[E0599]: no method named `cmp` found for type parameter `T` in the current scope
--> $DIR/method-on-unbounded-type-param.rs:2:7
|
LL | fn f<T>(a: T, b: T) -> std::cmp::Ordering {
| - method `cmp` not found for this type parameter
LL | a.cmp(&b)
| ^^^ method cannot be called on `T` due to unsatisfied trait bounds
|
= help: items from traits can only be used if the type parameter is bounded by the trait
help: the following traits define an item `cmp`, perhaps you need to restrict type parameter `T` with one of them:
|
LL | fn f<T: Ord>(a: T, b: T) -> std::cmp::Ordering {
| +++++
LL | fn f<T: Iterator>(a: T, b: T) -> std::cmp::Ordering {
| ++++++++++
```
Fix#120186.
pattern_analysis: use a plain `Vec` in `DeconstructedPat`
The use of an arena-allocated slice in `DeconstructedPat` dates to when we needed the arena anyway for lifetime reasons. Now that we don't, I'm thinking that if `thir::Pat` can use plain old `Vec`s, maybe so can I.
r? ```@ghost```
hir: Stop keeping prefixes for most of `use` list stems
And make sure all other imports have non-empty resolution lists.
Addresses one of FIXMEs in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120206.
rustc_monomorphize: fix outdated comment in partition
`max_cgu_count` was removed in 51821515b3, but not comment (usage in `merge_codegen_units` was removed earlier).
r? `@nnethercote`
Suggest `[tail @ ..]` on `[..tail]` and `[...tail]` where `tail` is unresolved
Fixes#120591.
~~Will conflict with #120570~~ (rebased).
r? estebank or compiler
Some cleanups around diagnostic levels.
Plus some refactoring in and around diagnostic levels and emission. Details in the individual commit logs.
r? ````@oli-obk````
Rework support for async closures; allow them to return futures that borrow from the closure's captures
This PR implements a new lowering for async closures via `TyKind::CoroutineClosure` which handles the curious relationship between the closure and the coroutine that it returns.
I wrote up a bunch in [this hackmd](https://hackmd.io/`@compiler-errors/S1HvqQxca)` which will be copied to the dev guide after this PR lands, and hopefully left sufficient comments in the source code explaining why this change is as large as it is.
This also necessitates that they begin implementing the `AsyncFn`-family of traits, rather than the `Fn`-family of traits -- if you need `Fn` implementations, you should probably use the non-sugar `|| async {}` syntax instead.
Notably this PR does not yet implement `async Fn()` syntax sugar for bounds, but I expect to add those soon (**edit:** #120392). For now, users must use `AsyncFn()` traits directly, which necessitates adding the `async_fn_traits` feature gate as well. I will add this as a follow-up very soon.
r? oli-obk
This is based on top of #120322, but that PR is minimal.
When encountering an `if let` tail expression without an `else` arm for an
enum with a single variant, suggest writing an irrefutable `let` binding
instead.
```
error[E0317]: `if` may be missing an `else` clause
--> $DIR/irrefutable-if-let-without-else.rs:8:5
|
LL | fn foo(x: Enum) -> i32 {
| --- expected `i32` because of this return type
LL | / if let Enum::Variant(value) = x {
LL | | value
LL | | }
| |_____^ expected `i32`, found `()`
|
= note: `if` expressions without `else` evaluate to `()`
= help: consider adding an `else` block that evaluates to the expected type
help: consider using an irrefutable `let` binding instead
|
LL ~ let Enum::Variant(value) = x;
LL ~ value
|
```
Fix#61788.
