update Miri
I had to use a hacked version of josh to create this, so let's be careful with merging this and maybe wait a bit to see if the josh issue becomes more clear. But the history looks good to me, we are not adding duplicates of rustc commits that were previously mirrored to Miri.
Also I want to add some cross-testing of Miri in x.py.
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #102287 (Elaborate supertrait bounds when triggering `unused_must_use` on `impl Trait`)
- #102922 (Filtering spans when emitting json)
- #103051 (translation: doc comments with derives, subdiagnostic-less enum variants, more derive use)
- #103111 (Account for hygiene in typo suggestions, and use them to point to shadowed names)
- #103260 (Fixup a few tests needing asm support)
- #103321 (rustdoc: improve appearance of source page navigation bar)
Failed merges:
- #103209 (Diagnostic derives: allow specifying multiple alternative suggestions)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Uplift `clippy::for_loops_over_fallibles` lint into rustc
This PR, as the title suggests, uplifts [`clippy::for_loops_over_fallibles`] lint into rustc. This lint warns for code like this:
```rust
for _ in Some(1) {}
for _ in Ok::<_, ()>(1) {}
```
i.e. directly iterating over `Option` and `Result` using `for` loop.
There are a number of suggestions that this PR adds (on top of what clippy suggested):
1. If the argument (? is there a better name for that expression) of a `for` loop is a `.next()` call, then we can suggest removing it (or rather replacing with `.by_ref()` to allow iterator being used later)
```rust
for _ in iter.next() {}
// turns into
for _ in iter.by_ref() {}
```
2. (otherwise) We can suggest using `while let`, this is useful for non-iterator, iterator-like things like [async] channels
```rust
for _ in rx.recv() {}
// turns into
while let Some(_) = rx.recv() {}
```
3. If the argument type is `Result<impl IntoIterator, _>` and the body has a `Result<_, _>` type, we can suggest using `?`
```rust
for _ in f() {}
// turns into
for _ in f()? {}
```
4. To preserve the original behavior and clear intent, we can suggest using `if let`
```rust
for _ in f() {}
// turns into
if let Some(_) = f() {}
```
(P.S. `Some` and `Ok` are interchangeable depending on the type)
I still feel that the lint wording/look is somewhat off, so I'll be happy to hear suggestions (on how to improve suggestions :D)!
Resolves#99272
[`clippy::for_loops_over_fallibles`]: https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#for_loops_over_fallibles
rename `ImplItemKind::TyAlias` to `ImplItemKind::Type`
The naming of this variant seems inconsistent given that this is not really a "type alias", and the associated type variant for `TraitItemKind` is just called `Type`.
Remove `mir::CastKind::Misc`
As discussed in #97649 `mir::CastKind::Misc` is not clear, this PR addresses that by creating a new enum variant for every valid cast.
r? ````@oli-obk````
Move lint level source explanation to the bottom
So, uhhhhh
r? `@estebank`
## User-facing change
"note: `#[warn(...)]` on by default" and such are moved to the bottom of the diagnostic:
```diff
- = note: `#[warn(unsupported_calling_conventions)]` on by default
= warning: this was previously accepted by the compiler but is being phased out; it will become a hard error in a future release!
= note: for more information, see issue #87678 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/87678>
+ = note: `#[warn(unsupported_calling_conventions)]` on by default
```
Why warning is enabled is the least important thing, so it shouldn't be the first note the user reads, IMO.
## Developer-facing change
`struct_span_lint` and similar methods have a different signature.
Before: `..., impl for<'a> FnOnce(LintDiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>)`
After: `..., impl Into<DiagnosticMessage>, impl for<'a, 'b> FnOnce(&'b mut DiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>) -> &'b mut DiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>`
The reason for this is that `struct_span_lint` needs to edit the diagnostic _after_ `decorate` closure is called. This also makes lint code a little bit nicer in my opinion.
Another option is to use `impl for<'a> FnOnce(LintDiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>) -> DiagnosticBuilder<'a, ()>` altough I don't _really_ see reasons to do `let lint = lint.build(message)` everywhere.
## Subtle problem
By moving the message outside of the closure (that may not be called if the lint is disabled) `format!(...)` is executed earlier, possibly formatting `Ty` which may call a query that trims paths that crashes the compiler if there were no warnings...
I don't think it's that big of a deal, considering that we move from `format!(...)` to `fluent` (which is lazy by-default) anyway, however this required adding a workaround which is unfortunate.
## P.S.
I'm sorry, I do not how to make this PR smaller/easier to review. Changes to the lint API affect SO MUCH 😢
`Res::SelfTy` currently has two `Option`s. When the second one is `Some`
the first one is never consulted. So we can split it into two variants,
`Res::SelfTyParam` and `Res::SelfTyAlias`, reducing the size of `Res`
from 24 bytes to 12. This then shrinks `hir::Path` and
`hir::PathSegment`, which are the HIR types that take up the most space.
