Partially fixes#15656 . When a crate graph is extended which is the case when new workspaces are added to the project
the rules for deduplication were too strict. One problem that arises from this is that in certain conditions
when we see the same crate having different `CrateOrigin`s the first form would be maintained. This approach however
results in some unwanted results such as making renaming forbidden as this has been recently only made available for
local crates. The given example in #15656 can still not be resolved with this PR as that involves taking inconsistencies
between dependencies into consideration. This will be addressed in a future PR.
Cancelable Initialization
This commit provides additional initialization methods to Connection in order to support CTRL + C sigterm handling.
In the process of adding LSP to Nushell (see https://github.com/nushell/nushell/pull/10941) this gap has been identified.
ensure renames happen after edit
This is a bugfix for an issue I fould while working on helix. Rust-analyzer currently always sends any filesystem edits (rename/file creation) before any other edits. When renaming a file that is also being edited that would mean that the edit would be discarded and therefore an incomplete/incorrect refactor (or even cause the creation of a new file in helix altough that is probably a pub on our side).
Example:
* create a module: `mod foo` containing a `pub sturct Bar;`
* reexport the struct uneder a different name in the `foo` module using a *fully qualified path*: `pub use crate::foo::Bar as Bar2`.
* rename the `foo` module to `foo2` using rust-analyzer
* obsereve that the path is not correctly updated (rust-analyer first sends a rename `foo.rs` to `foo2.rs` and then edits `foo.rs` after)
This PR fixes that issue by simply executing all rename operations after all edit operations (while still executing file creation operations first). I also added a testcase similar to the example above.
Relevent excerpt from the LSP standard:
> Since version 3.13.0 a workspace edit can contain resource operations (create, delete or rename files and folders) as well. If resource operations are present clients need to execute the operations in the order in which they are provided. So a workspace edit for example can consist of the following two changes: (1) create file a.txt and (2) a text document edit which insert text into file a.txt. An invalid sequence (e.g. (1) delete file a.txt and (2) insert text into file a.txt) will cause failure of the operation. How the client recovers from the failure is described by the client capability: workspace.workspaceEdit.failureHandling
Add `$message_type` field to distinguish json diagnostic outputs
Currently the json-formatted outputs have no way to unambiguously determine which kind of message is being output. A consumer can look for specific fields in the json object (eg "message"), but there's no guarantee that in future some other kind of output will have a field of the same name.
This PR adds a `"type"` field to add json outputs which can be used to unambiguously determine which kind of output it is. The mapping is:
`diagnostic`: regular compiler diagnostics
`artifact`: artifact notifications
`future_incompat`: Future incompatibility report
`unused_extern`: Unused crate warnings/errors
This matches the "internally tagged" representation for serde enums.
Add arm64e-apple-ios & arm64e-apple-darwin targets
This introduces
* `arm64e-apple-ios`
* `arm64e-apple-darwin`
Rust targets for support `arm64e` architecture on `iOS` and `Darwin`.
So, this is a first approach for integrating to the Rust compiler.
## Tier 3 Target Policy
> * A tier 3 target must have a designated developer or developers (the "target
maintainers") on record to be CCed when issues arise regarding the target.
(The mechanism to track and CC such developers may evolve over time.)
I will be the target maintainer.
> * Targets must use naming consistent with any existing targets; for instance, a
target for the same CPU or OS as an existing Rust target should use the same
name for that CPU or OS. Targets should normally use the same names and
naming conventions as used elsewhere in the broader ecosystem beyond Rust
(such as in other toolchains), unless they have a very good reason to
diverge. Changing the name of a target can be highly disruptive, especially
once the target reaches a higher tier, so getting the name right is important
even for a tier 3 target.
Target names should not introduce undue confusion or ambiguity unless
absolutely necessary to maintain ecosystem compatibility. For example, if
the name of the target makes people extremely likely to form incorrect
beliefs about what it targets, the name should be changed or augmented to
disambiguate it.
If possible, use only letters, numbers, dashes and underscores for the name.
Periods (.) are known to cause issues in Cargo.
The target names `arm64e-apple-ios`, `arm64e-apple-darwin` were derived from `aarch64-apple-ios`, `aarch64-apple-darwin`.
In this [ticket,](#73628) people discussed the best suitable names for these targets.
> In some cases, the arm64e arch might be "different". For example:
> * `thread_set_state` might fail with (os/kern) protection failure if we try to call it from arm64 process to arm64e process.
> * The returning value of dlsym is PAC signed on arm64e, while left untouched on arm64
> * Some function like pthread_create_from_mach_thread requires a PAC signed function pointer on arm64e, which is not required on arm64.
So, I have chosen them because there are similar triplets in LLVM. I think there are no more suitable names for these targets.
> * Tier 3 targets may have unusual requirements to build or use, but must not
create legal issues or impose onerous legal terms for the Rust project or for
Rust developers or users.
The target must not introduce license incompatibilities.
Anything added to the Rust repository must be under the standard Rust
license (MIT OR Apache-2.0).
The target must not cause the Rust tools or libraries built for any other
host (even when supporting cross-compilation to the target) to depend
on any new dependency less permissive than the Rust licensing policy. This
applies whether the dependency is a Rust crate that would require adding
new license exceptions (as specified by the tidy tool in the
rust-lang/rust repository), or whether the dependency is a native library
or binary. In other words, the introduction of the target must not cause a
user installing or running a version of Rust or the Rust tools to be
subject to any new license requirements.
Compiling, linking, and emitting functional binaries, libraries, or other
code for the target (whether hosted on the target itself or cross-compiling
from another target) must not depend on proprietary (non-FOSS) libraries.
Host tools built for the target itself may depend on the ordinary runtime
libraries supplied by the platform and commonly used by other applications
built for the target, but those libraries must not be required for code
generation for the target; cross-compilation to the target must not require
such libraries at all. For instance, rustc built for the target may
depend on a common proprietary C runtime library or console output library,
but must not depend on a proprietary code generation library or code
optimization library. Rust's license permits such combinations, but the
Rust project has no interest in maintaining such combinations within the
scope of Rust itself, even at tier 3.
"onerous" here is an intentionally subjective term. At a minimum, "onerous"
legal/licensing terms include but are not limited to: non-disclosure
requirements, non-compete requirements, contributor license agreements
(CLAs) or equivalent, "non-commercial"/"research-only"/etc terms,
requirements conditional on the employer or employment of any particular
Rust developers, revocable terms, any requirements that create liability
for the Rust project or its developers or users, or any requirements that
adversely affect the livelihood or prospects of the Rust project or its
developers or users.
No dependencies were added to Rust.
> * Neither this policy nor any decisions made regarding targets shall create any
binding agreement or estoppel by any party. If any member of an approving
Rust team serves as one of the maintainers of a target, or has any legal or
employment requirement (explicit or implicit) that might affect their
decisions regarding a target, they must recuse themselves from any approval
decisions regarding the target's tier status, though they may otherwise
participate in discussions.
> * This requirement does not prevent part or all of this policy from being
cited in an explicit contract or work agreement (e.g. to implement or
maintain support for a target). This requirement exists to ensure that a
developer or team responsible for reviewing and approving a target does not
face any legal threats or obligations that would prevent them from freely
exercising their judgment in such approval, even if such judgment involves
subjective matters or goes beyond the letter of these requirements.
Understood.
I am not a member of a Rust team.
> * Tier 3 targets should attempt to implement as much of the standard libraries
as possible and appropriate (core for most targets, alloc for targets
that can support dynamic memory allocation, std for targets with an
operating system or equivalent layer of system-provided functionality), but
may leave some code unimplemented (either unavailable or stubbed out as
appropriate), whether because the target makes it impossible to implement or
challenging to implement. The authors of pull requests are not obligated to
avoid calling any portions of the standard library on the basis of a tier 3
target not implementing those portions.
Understood.
`std` is supported.
> * The target must provide documentation for the Rust community explaining how
to build for the target, using cross-compilation if possible. If the target
supports running binaries, or running tests (even if they do not pass), the
documentation must explain how to run such binaries or tests for the target,
using emulation if possible or dedicated hardware if necessary.
Building is described in the derived target doc.
> * Tier 3 targets must not impose burden on the authors of pull requests, or
other developers in the community, to maintain the target. In particular,
do not post comments (automated or manual) on a PR that derail or suggest a
block on the PR based on a tier 3 target. Do not send automated messages or
notifications (via any medium, including via `@)` to a PR author or others
involved with a PR regarding a tier 3 target, unless they have opted into
such messages.
> * Backlinks such as those generated by the issue/PR tracker when linking to
an issue or PR are not considered a violation of this policy, within
reason. However, such messages (even on a separate repository) must not
generate notifications to anyone involved with a PR who has not requested
such notifications.
Understood.
> * Patches adding or updating tier 3 targets must not break any existing tier 2
or tier 1 target, and must not knowingly break another tier 3 target without
approval of either the compiler team or the maintainers of the other tier 3
target.
> * In particular, this may come up when working on closely related targets,
such as variations of the same architecture with different features. Avoid
introducing unconditional uses of features that another variation of the
target may not have; use conditional compilation or runtime detection, as
appropriate, to let each target run code supported by that target.
These targets are not fully ABI compatible with arm64e code.
#73628
Ensure sanity of all computed ABIs
This moves the ABI sanity assertions from the codegen backend to the ABI computation logic. Sadly, due to past mistakes, we [have to](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/117351#issuecomment-1788495503) be able to compute a sane ABI for nonsensical function types like `extern "C" fn(str) -> str`. So to make the sanity check pass we first need to make all ABI adjustment deal with unsized types... and we have no shared infrastructure for those adjustments, so that's a bunch of copy-paste. At least we have assertions failing loudly when one accidentally sets a different mode for an unsized argument.
To achieve this, this re-lands the parts of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/80594 that got reverted in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/81388. To avoid breaking wasm ABI again, that ABI now explicitly opts-in to the (wrong, broken) ABI that we currently keep for backwards compatibility. That's still better than having *every* ABI use the wrong broken default!
Cc `@bjorn3`
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/115845
doc: add release notes to standalone doc bundle
Preview: http://notriddle.com/rustdoc-html-demo-5/release-notes/releases.html
This is a workaround for #101714 on top of being a useful addition in its own right. It is intended to change the "canonical URL" for viewing the release notes from GitHub, which is relatively slow, to a pre-rendered HTML file that loads from the same CDN as the standard library docs. It also means you get a copy of the release notes when installing the rust-docs with rustup.
Adjust frame IP in backtraces relative to image base for SGX target
This is followup to https://github.com/rust-lang/backtrace-rs/pull/566.
The backtraces printed by `panic!` or generated by `std::backtrace::Backtrace` in SGX target are not usable. The frame addresses need to be relative to image base address so they can be used for symbol resolution. Here's an example panic backtrace generated before this change:
```
$ cargo r --target x86_64-fortanix-unknown-sgx
...
stack backtrace:
0: 0x7f8fe401d3a5 - <unknown>
1: 0x7f8fe4034780 - <unknown>
2: 0x7f8fe401c5a3 - <unknown>
3: 0x7f8fe401d1f5 - <unknown>
4: 0x7f8fe401e6f6 - <unknown>
```
Here's the same panic after this change:
```
$ cargo +stage1 r --target x86_64-fortanix-unknown-sgx
stack backtrace:
0: 0x198bf - <unknown>
1: 0x3d181 - <unknown>
2: 0x26164 - <unknown>
3: 0x19705 - <unknown>
4: 0x1ef36 - <unknown>
```
cc `@jethrogb` and `@workingjubilee`
Set `CFG_OMIT_GIT_HASH=1` during builds when `omit-git-hash` is enabled
This environment variable will allow tools like Cargo to disable their own detection when `omit-git-hash` is set to `true`.
I created this PR because of https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/12968. There is not a dependency between the two PRs, they can land in any order. They just won't do anything until both of them are merged into the repo.
deprecate `if-available` value of `download-ci-llvm`
This PR deprecates the use of the `if-available` value for `download-ci-llvm` since `if-unchanged` serves the same purpose when no changes are detected. In cases where changes are present, it is assumed that compiling LLVM is acceptable (otherwise, why make changes there?).
This was probably missing in the #110087 issue before.
cc `@RalfJung`
Remove option_payload_ptr; redundant to offset_of
The `option_payload_ptr` intrinsic is no longer required as `offset_of` supports traversing enums (#114208). This PR removes it in order to dogfood offset_of (as suggested at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/106655#issuecomment-1790907626). However, it will not build until those changes reach beta (which I think is within the next 8 days?) so I've opened it as a draft.
Expose tests for {f32,f64}.total_cmp in docs
Expose tests for {f32,f64}.total_cmp in docs
Uncomment the helpful `assert_eq!` line, which is stripped out completely in docs, and leaves the reader to mentally play through the algorithm, or go to the playground and add a println!, to see what the result will be.
(If these tests are known to fail on some platforms, is there some mechanism to conditionalize this or escape the test so the `assert_eq!` source will be visible on the web? I am a newbie, which is why I was reading docs ;)
Reenable effects in libcore
With #116670, #117531, and #117171, I think we would be comfortable with re-enabling the effects feature for more testing in libcore.
r? `@oli-obk`
cc `@fmease`
cc #110395
Add some additional warnings for duplicated diagnostic items
This commit adds warnings if a user supplies several diagnostic options where we can only apply one of them. We explicitly warn about ignored options here. In addition a small test for these warnings is added.
r? `@compiler-errors`
For now that's the last PR to improve the warnings generated by misused `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attributes. I'm not sure what needs to be done next to move this closer to stabilization.
Add T: ?Sized to `RwLockReadGuard` and `RwLockWriteGuard`'s Debug impls.
For context, `MutexGuard` has `+ ?Sized` on its `Debug` impl, and all three have `+ ?Sized` on their `Display` impls.
It looks like the `?Sized` was just missed when the impls were added (the impl for `MutexGuard` was added in the same PR (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/38006) with support for `T: Debug + ?Sized`, and `RwLock*Guard`s did allow `T: ?Sized` types already); the `Display` impls were added later (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/42822) with support for `T: Debug + ?Sized` types.
I think this needs a T-libs-api FCP? I'm not sure if this also needs an ACP. If so I can make one.
These are changes to (stable) trait impls on stable types so will be insta-stable.
`@rustbot` label +T-libs-api
More detail when expecting expression but encountering bad macro argument
On nested macro invocations where the same macro fragment changes fragment type from one to the next, point at the chain of invocations and at the macro fragment definition place, explaining that the change has occurred.
Fix#71039.
```
error: expected expression, found pattern `1 + 1`
--> $DIR/trace_faulty_macros.rs:49:37
|
LL | (let $p:pat = $e:expr) => {test!(($p,$e))};
| ------- -- this is interpreted as expression, but it is expected to be pattern
| |
| this macro fragment matcher is expression
...
LL | (($p:pat, $e:pat)) => {let $p = $e;};
| ------ ^^ expected expression
| |
| this macro fragment matcher is pattern
...
LL | test!(let x = 1+1);
| ------------------
| | |
| | this is expected to be expression
| in this macro invocation
|
= note: when forwarding a matched fragment to another macro-by-example, matchers in the second macro will see an opaque AST of the fragment type, not the underlying tokens
= note: this error originates in the macro `test` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
```
feat: implement `DoubleEndedSearcher` for `CharArray[Ref]Searcher`
This PR implements `DoubleEndedSearcher` for both `CharArraySearcher` and `CharArrayRefSearcher`. I'm not sure whether this was just overlooked or if there is a reason for it, but since it behaves exactly like `CharSliceSearcher`, I think the implementations should be appropriate.
ignore implied bounds with placeholders
given the following code:
```rust
trait Trait {
type Ty<'a> where Self: 'a;
}
impl<T> Trait for T {
type Ty<'a> = () where Self: 'a;
}
struct Foo<T: Trait>(T)
where
for<'x> T::Ty<'x>: Sized;
```
when computing the implied bounds from `Foo<X>` we incorrectly get the bound `X: !x` from the normalization of ` for<'x> <X as Trait>::Ty::<'x>: Sized`. This is a a known bug! we shouldn't use the constraints that arise from normalization as implied bounds. See #109628.
Ignore these bounds for now. This should prevent later ICEs.
Fixes#112250Fixes#107409
new solver normalization improvements
cool beans
At the core of this PR is a `try_normalize_ty` which stops for rigid aliases by using `commit_if_ok`.
Reworks alias-relate to fully normalize both the lhs and rhs and then equate the resulting rigid (or inference) types. This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/68 by avoiding the exponential blowup. Also supersedes #116369 by only defining opaque types if the hidden type is rigid.
I removed the stability check in `EvalCtxt::evaluate_goal` due to https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/75. While I personally have opinions on how to fix it, that still requires further t-types/`@nikomatsakis` buy-in, so I removed that for now. Once we've decided on our approach there, we can revert this commit.
r? `@compiler-errors`
document ABI compatibility
I don't think we have any central place where we document our ABI compatibility rules, so let's create one. The `fn()` pointer type seems like a good place since ABI questions can only become relevant when invoking a function through a function pointer.
This will likely need T-lang FCP.
