rework `-Zverbose`
implements the changes described in https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/706
the first commit is only a name change from `-Zverbose` to `-Zverbose-internals` and does not change behavior. the second commit changes diagnostics.
possible follow up work:
- `ty::pretty` could print more info with `--verbose` than it does currently. `-Z verbose-internals` shows too much info in a way that's not helpful to users. michael had ideas about this i didn't fully understand: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/233931-t-compiler.2Fmajor-changes/topic/uplift.20some.20-Zverbose.20calls.20and.20rename.20to.E2.80.A6.20compiler-team.23706/near/408984200
- `--verbose` should imply `-Z write-long-types-to-disk=no`. the code in `ty_string_with_limit` should take `--verbose` into account (apparently this affects `Ty::sort_string`, i'm not familiar with this code). writing a file to disk should suggest passing `--verbose`.
r? `@compiler-errors` cc `@estebank`
- Sort dependencies and features sections.
- Add `tidy` markers to the sorted sections so they stay sorted.
- Remove empty `[lib`] sections.
- Remove "See more keys..." comments.
Excluded files:
- rustc_codegen_{cranelift,gcc}, because they're external.
- rustc_lexer, because it has external use.
- stable_mir, because it has external use.
It lints against features that are inteded to be internal to the
compiler and standard library. Implements MCP #596.
We allow `internal_features` in the standard library and compiler as those
use many features and this _is_ the standard library from the "internal to the compiler and
standard library" after all.
Marking some features as internal wasn't exactly the most scientific approach, I just marked some
mostly obvious features. While there is a categorization in the macro,
it's not very well upheld (should probably be fixed in another PR).
We always pass `-Ainternal_features` in the testsuite
About 400 UI tests and several other tests use internal features.
Instead of throwing the attribute on each one, just always allow them.
There's nothing wrong with testing internal features^^
Rewrite MemDecoder around pointers not a slice
This is basically https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/109910 but I'm being a lot more aggressive. The pointer-based structure means that it makes a lot more sense to absorb more complexity into `MemDecoder`, most of the diff is just complexity moving from one place to another.
The primary argument for this structure is that we only incur a single bounds check when doing multi-byte reads from a `MemDecoder`. With the slice-based implementation we need to do those with `data[position..position + len]` , which needs to account for `position + len` wrapping. It would be possible to dodge the first bounds check if we stored a slice that starts at `position`, but that would require updating the pointer and length on every read.
This PR also embeds the failure path in a separate function, which means that this PR should subsume all the perf wins observed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/109867.
Panic instead of truncating if the incremental on-disk cache is too big
It seems _unlikely_ that anyone would hit this truncation, but if this `as` does actually truncate, that seems incredibly bad.
Switch to `EarlyBinder` for `collect_return_position_impl_trait_in_trait_tys`
Part of the work to finish https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/105779.
This PR adds `EarlyBinder` to the return type of the `collect_return_position_impl_trait_in_trait_tys` query and removes `bound_return_position_impl_trait_in_trait_tys`.
r? `@lcnr`
Encode hashes as bytes, not varint
In a few places, we store hashes as `u64` or `u128` and then apply `derive(Decodable, Encodable)` to the enclosing struct/enum. It is more efficient to encode hashes directly than try to apply some varint encoding. This PR adds two new types `Hash64` and `Hash128` which are produced by `StableHasher` and replace every use of storing a `u64` or `u128` that represents a hash.
Distribution of the byte lengths of leb128 encodings, from `x build --stage 2` with `incremental = true`
Before:
```
( 1) 373418203 (53.7%, 53.7%): 1
( 2) 196240113 (28.2%, 81.9%): 3
( 3) 108157958 (15.6%, 97.5%): 2
( 4) 17213120 ( 2.5%, 99.9%): 4
( 5) 223614 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 9
( 6) 216262 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 10
( 7) 15447 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 5
( 8) 3633 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 19
( 9) 3030 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 8
( 10) 1167 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 18
( 11) 1032 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 7
( 12) 1003 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 6
( 13) 10 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 16
( 14) 10 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 17
( 15) 5 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 12
( 16) 4 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 14
```
After:
```
( 1) 372939136 (53.7%, 53.7%): 1
( 2) 196240140 (28.3%, 82.0%): 3
( 3) 108014969 (15.6%, 97.5%): 2
( 4) 17192375 ( 2.5%,100.0%): 4
( 5) 435 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 5
( 6) 83 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 18
( 7) 79 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 10
( 8) 50 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 9
( 9) 6 ( 0.0%,100.0%): 19
```
The remaining 9 or 10 and 18 or 19 are `u64` and `u128` respectively that have the high bits set. As far as I can tell these are coming primarily from `SwitchTargets`.
