fix: Don't skip closure captures after let-else
As I understand that `return` was left there by accident. It caused capture analysis to skip the rest of the block after a let-else, and then missed captures caused incorrect results in borrowck, closure hints, layout calculation, etc.
Fixes#15623
I didn't understand why I using the example from #15623 as-is doesn't work - I don't get the warnings unless I remove the `call_me()` call, even on the same commit as my own RA version which does show those warnings.
repr(transparent): it's fine if the one non-1-ZST field is a ZST
This code currently gets rejected:
```rust
#[repr(transparent)]
struct MyType([u16; 0])
```
That clearly seems like a bug to me: `repr(transparent)` [got defined ](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/77841#issuecomment-716575747) as having any number of 1-ZST fields plus optionally one more field; `MyType` clearly satisfies that definition.
This PR changes the `repr(transparent)` logic to actually match that definition.
Make `.rmeta` file in `dep-info` have correct name (`lib` prefix)
Since `filename_for_metadata()` and
`OutputFilenames::path(OutputType::Metadata)` had different logic for the name of the metadata file, the `.d` file contained a file name different from the actual name used. Share the logic to fix the out-of-sync name.
Without this fix, the `.d` file contained
dash-separated_something-extra.rmeta: dash-separated.rs
instead of
libdash_separated_something-extra.rmeta: dash-separated.rs
which is the name of the file that is actually written by the compiler.
Worth noting: It took me several iterations to get all tests to pass, so I am relatively confident that this PR does not break anything.
Closes#68839
`#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` without filters
This commit adds support for a `#[diagnostic::on_unimplemented]` attribute with the following options:
* `message` to customize the primary error message
* `note` to add a customized note message to an error message
* `label` to customize the label part of the error message
The relevant behavior is specified in [RFC-3366](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3366-diagnostic-attribute-namespace.html)
Field shorthand overwritten in promote local to const assist
Currently, running `promote_local_to_const` on the following:
```rust
struct Foo {
bar: usize,
}
fn main() {
let $0bar = 0;
let foo = Foo { bar };
}
```
Results in:
```rust
struct Foo {
bar: usize,
}
fn main() {
const BAR: usize = 0;
let foo = Foo { BAR };
}
```
But instead should be something like:
```rust
struct Foo {
bar: usize,
}
fn main() {
const BAR: usize = 0;
let foo = Foo { bar: BAR };
}
```
closure field capturing: don't depend on alignment of packed fields
This fixes the closure field capture part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/115305: field capturing always stops at projections into packed structs, no matter the alignment of the field. This means changing a private field type from `u8` to `u64` can never change how closures capture fields, which is probably what we want.
Here's an example where, before this PR, changing the type of a private field in a repr(Rust) struct can change the output of a program:
```rust
#![allow(dead_code)]
mod m {
// before patch
#[derive(Default)]
pub struct S1(u8);
// after patch
#[derive(Default)]
pub struct S2(u64);
}
struct NoisyDrop;
impl Drop for NoisyDrop {
fn drop(&mut self) {
eprintln!("dropped!");
}
}
#[repr(packed)]
struct MyType {
field: m::S1, // output changes when this becomes S2
other_field: NoisyDrop,
third_field: Vec<()>,
}
fn test(r: MyType) {
let c = || {
let _val = std::ptr::addr_of!(r.field);
let _val = r.third_field;
};
drop(c);
eprintln!("before dropping");
}
fn main() {
test(MyType {
field: Default::default(),
other_field: NoisyDrop,
third_field: Vec::new(),
});
}
```
Of course this is a breaking change for the same reason that doing field capturing in the first place was a breaking change. Packed fields are relatively rare and depending on drop order is relatively rare, so I don't expect this to have much impact, but it's hard to be sure and even a crater run will only tell us so much.
Also see the [nomination comment](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/115315#issuecomment-1702807825).
Cc `@rust-lang/wg-rfc-2229` `@ehuss`
Make useless_ptr_null_checks smarter about some std functions
This teaches the `useless_ptr_null_checks` lint that some std functions can't ever return null pointers, because they need to point to valid data, get references as input, etc.
This is achieved by introducing an `#[rustc_never_returns_null_ptr]` attribute and adding it to these std functions (gated behind bootstrap `cfg_attr`).
Later on, the attribute could maybe be used to tell LLVM that the returned pointer is never null. I don't expect much impact of that though, as the functions are pretty shallow and usually the input data is already never null.
Follow-up of PR #113657Fixes#114442
Fallback effects even if types also fallback
`||` is short circuiting, so if we do ty/int var fallback, we *don't* do effect fallback 😸
r? `@fee1-dead` or `@oli-obk`
Fixes#115791Fixes#115842
Improve invalid let expression handling
- Move all of the checks for valid let expression positions to parsing.
- Add a field to ExprKind::Let in AST/HIR to mark whether it's in a valid location.
- Suppress some later errors and MIR construction for invalid let expressions.
- Fix a (drop) scope issue that was also responsible for #104172.
Fixes#104172Fixes#104868
treat host effect params as erased in codegen
This fixes the changes brought to codegen tests when effect params are added to libcore, by not attempting to monomorphize functions that get the host param by being `const fn`.
r? `@oli-obk`
some inspect improvements
split from #114810 because I still want to experiment a bunch with that PR and these changes are self-contained.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Rework `no_coverage` to `coverage(off)`
As discussed at the tail of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/84605 this replaces the `no_coverage` attribute with a `coverage` attribute that takes sub-parameters (currently `off` and `on`) to control the coverage instrumentation.
Allows future-proofing for things like `coverage(off, reason="Tested live", issue="#12345")` or similar.
Bubble up opaque <eq> opaque operations instead of picking an order
In case we are in `Bubble` mode (meaning every opaque type that is defined in the current crate is treated as if it were in its defining scope), we don't try to register an opaque type as the hidden type of another opaque type, but instead bubble up an obligation to equate them at the query caller site. Usually that means we have a `DefiningAnchor::Bind` and thus can reliably figure out whether an opaque type is in its defining scope. Where we can't, we'll error out, so the default is sound.
With this change we start using `AliasTyEq` predicates in the old solver, too.
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/108498
But also regresses `tests/ui/impl-trait/anon_scope_creep.rs`. Our use of `Bubble` for `check_opaque_type_well_formed` is going to keep biting us.
r? `@lcnr` `@compiler-errors`
ide : Disallow renaming of non-local items
fixes#14850 . This makes me wonder , why stop at structs and not do the same for other ADTs? Would be happy to add them too if nothing speaks against it.
Allow redirecting subprocess stdout to our stderr etc. (redux)
This is the code from #88561, tidied up, including review suggestions, and with the for-testing-only CI commit removed. FCP for the API completed in #88561.
I have made a new MR to facilitate review. The discussion there is very cluttered and the branch is full of changes (in many cases as a result of changes to other Rust stdlib APIs since then). Assuming this MR is approvedl we should close that one.
### Reviewer doing a de novo review
Just code review these four commits.. FCP discussion starts here: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/88561#issuecomment-1640527595
Portability tests: you can see that this branch works on Windows too by looking at the CI results in #88561, which has the same code changes as this branch but with an additional "DO NOT MERGE" commit to make the Windows tests run.
### Reviewer doing an incremental review from some version of #88561
Review the new commits since your last review. I haven't force pushed the branch there.
git diff the two branches (eg `git diff 176886197d6..0842b69c219`). You'll see that the only difference is in gitlab CI files. You can also see that *this* MR doesn't touch those files.
