std: refactor the TLS implementation
As discovered by Mara in #110897, our TLS implementation is a total mess. In the past months, I have simplified the actual macros and their expansions, but the majority of the complexity comes from the platform-specific support code needed to create keys and register destructors. In keeping with #117276, I have therefore moved all of the `thread_local_key`/`thread_local_dtor` modules to the `thread_local` module in `sys` and merged them into a new structure, so that future porters of `std` can simply mix-and-match the existing code instead of having to copy the same (bad) implementation everywhere. The new structure should become obvious when looking at `sys/thread_local/mod.rs`.
Unfortunately, the documentation changes associated with the refactoring have made this PR rather large. That said, this contains no functional changes except for two small ones:
* the key-based destructor fallback now, by virtue of sharing the implementation used by macOS and others, stores its list in a `#[thread_local]` static instead of in the key, eliminating one indirection layer and drastically simplifying its code.
* I've switched over ZKVM (tier 3) to use the same implementation as WebAssembly, as the implementation was just a way worse version of that
Please let me know if I can make this easier to review! I know these large PRs aren't optimal, but I couldn't think of any good intermediate steps.
`@rustbot` label +A-thread-locals
minor : Fix duplicate snippets showing up on hover.
With each `config::apply_change` duplicate configs were being added.
Now we first drain the vec that holds these and then start adding. This fixes#17485
internal: Some more small memory optimizations
Not a big impact on metrics, though there are some more savings in queries mainly used by the IDE layer from this
fix: Improve hover text in unlinked file diagnostics
Use full sentences, and mention how to disable the diagnostic if users are intentionally working on unowned files.
(Full disclosure: I've tested a rust-analyzer build in VS Code, but the pop-up logic is currently disabled due to #17062, so I haven't tested that.)
fix: pattern completions in let-stmt
fix#17480.
We can write `let S { a, b } = s;` or `let Some(x) = a else {}`, so it is reasonable to allow pattern completions in `LetStmt`.
Simplify some term search tactics
Working on the paper `@phijor` found that "Data constructor" tactic could be simplified quite a bit by running it only in the backwards direction. With n+1 rounds it has same coverage as previous implementation in n rounds, however the tactic it self is more simple and also potentially faster as there is less to do.
In a nutshell the idea is to only work with types in the wish-list rather than with any types.
Turns out it is quite a bit faster:
Before:
```
ripgrep:
Tail Expr syntactic hits: 238/1692 (14%)
Tail Exprs found: 1223/1692 (72%)
Term search avg time: 15ms
nalgebra:
Tail Expr syntactic hits: 125/3001 (4%)
Tail Exprs found: 2143/3001 (71%)
Term search avg time: 849ms
```
After
````
ripgrep:
Tail Expr syntactic hits: 246/1692 (14%)
Tail Exprs found: 1209/1692 (71%)
Term search avg time: 8ms
nalgebra:
Tail Expr syntactic hits: 125/3001 (4%)
Tail Exprs found: 2028/3001 (67%)
Term search avg time: 305ms
````
_Also removed niche optimization of removing scope defs from the search space as this wasn't helping much anyway and made code a bit more complex._
Remove confusing `use_polonius` flag and do less cloning
The `use_polonius` flag is both redundant and confusing since every function it's propagated to also checks if `all_facts` is `Some`, the true test of whether to generate Polonius facts for Polonius or for external consumers. This PR makes that path clearer by simply doing away with the argument and handling the logic in precisely two places: where facts are populated (check for `Some`), and where `all_facts` are initialised. It also delays some statements until after that check to avoid the miniscule performance penalty of executing them when Polonius is disabled.
This also addresses `@lqd's` concern in #125652 by reducing the size of what is cloned out of Polonius facts to just the facts being added, as opposed to the entire vector of potential inputs, and added descriptive comments.
*Reviewer note*: the comments in `add_extra_drop_facts` should be inspected by a reviewer, in particular the one on [L#259](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/compare/master...amandasystems:you-dropped-this-again?expand=1#diff-aa727290e6670264df2face84f012897878e11a70e9c8b156543cfcd9619bac3R259) in this PR, which should be trivial for someone with the right background knowledge to address.
I also included some lints I found on the way there that I couldn't help myself from addressing.
fix: use ItemInNs::Macros to convert ModuleItem to ItemInNs
fix#17425.
When converting `PathResolution` to `ItemInNs`, we should convert `ModuleDef::Macro` to `ItemInNs::Macros` to ensure that it can be found in `DefMap`.
Stop sorting `Span`s' `SyntaxContext`, as that is incompatible with incremental
work towards https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90317
Luckily no one actually needed these to be sorted, so it didn't even affect diagnostics. I'm guessing they'd have been sorted by creation time anyway, so it wouldn't really have mattered.
r? `@cjgillot`
Replace sort implementations
This PR replaces the sort implementations with tailor-made ones that strike a balance of run-time, compile-time and binary-size, yielding run-time and compile-time improvements. Regressing binary-size for `slice::sort` while improving it for `slice::sort_unstable`. All while upholding the existing soft and hard safety guarantees, and even extending the soft guarantees, detecting strict weak ordering violations with a high chance and reporting it to users via a panic.
* `slice::sort` -> driftsort [design document](https://github.com/Voultapher/sort-research-rs/blob/main/writeup/driftsort_introduction/text.md), includes detailed benchmarks and analysis.
* `slice::sort_unstable` -> ipnsort [design document](https://github.com/Voultapher/sort-research-rs/blob/main/writeup/ipnsort_introduction/text.md), includes detailed benchmarks and analysis.
#### Why should we change the sort implementations?
In the [2023 Rust survey](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/02/19/2023-Rust-Annual-Survey-2023-results.html#challenges), one of the questions was: "In your opinion, how should work on the following aspects of Rust be prioritized?". The second place was "Runtime performance" and the third one "Compile Times". This PR aims to improve both.
#### Why is this one big PR and not multiple?
* The current documentation gives performance recommendations for `slice::sort` and `slice::sort_unstable`. If for example only one of them were to be changed, this advice would be misleading for some Rust versions. By replacing them atomically, the advice remains largely unchanged, and users don't have to change their code.
* driftsort and ipnsort share a substantial part of their implementations.
* The implementation of `select_nth_unstable` uses internals of `slice::sort_unstable`, which makes it impractical to split changes.
---
This PR is a collaboration with `@orlp.`
