Fix hidden title in rustdoc book
raw html is treated as actual html by markdown, so this title needs to use some form of escaping in order to display correctly
Unfortunately, we can't always offer a machine-applicable suggestion when there are subpatterns from macro expansion.
Co-Authored-By: Guillaume Boisseau <Nadrieril@users.noreply.github.com>
solve: all "non-structural" logging to trace
This enables us to start with `RUSTC_LOG=rustc_trait_selection::solve=debug` to figure out *where* something went wrong, to then separately use `trace` to get to the details.
r? ``@compiler-errors``
Fix some minor issues from the ui-test auto-porting
I'm not sure if these count as false positives, because well, starting a comment with `// incremental` was probably a valid compiletest directive.
But anyway, these tests directives became clearly goofy and now with the better syntax we can straighten things out.
r? jieyouxu
Migrate rustdoc scrape examples ordering
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121876.
This one adds a lot of utility methods/functions. To prevent having too much changes at once, I didn't make the existing rmake tests use these yet but I'll send a follow-up so they all use it.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Update reference safety requirements
Per https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116677#issuecomment-1945495786, the language as written promises too much. This PR relaxes the language to be consistent with current semantics. If and when #117945 is implemented, we can revert to the old language.
While we're here, we also require that references be non-null.
cc ``@RalfJung``
std::alloc: use posix_memalign instead of memalign on solarish
`memalign` on Solarish requires the alignment to be at least the size of a pointer, which we did not honor. `posix_memalign` also requires that, but that code path already takes care of this requirement.
close GH-124787
use key-value format in stage0 file
Currently, we are working on the python removal task on bootstrap. Which means we have to extract some data from the stage0 file using shell scripts. However, parsing values from the stage0.json file is painful because shell scripts don't have a built-in way to parse json files.
This change simplifies the stage0 file format to key-value pairs, which makes it easily readable from any environment.
See the zulip thread for more details: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/326414-t-infra.2Fbootstrap/topic/Using.20different.20format.20in.20the.20stage0.20file
Fix, document, and test parser and pretty-printer edge cases related to braced macro calls
_Review note: this is a deceptively small PR because it comes with 145 lines of docs and 196 lines of tests, and only 25 lines of compiler code changed. However, I recommend reviewing it 1 commit at a time because much of the effect of the code changes is non-local i.e. affecting code that is not visible in the final state of the PR. I have paid attention that reviewing the PR one commit at a time is as easy as I can make it. All of the code you need to know about is touched in those commits, even if some of those changes disappear by the end of the stack._
This is a follow-up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119105. One case that is not relevant to `-Zunpretty=expanded`, but which came up as I'm porting #119105 and #118726 into `syn`'s printer and `prettyplease`'s printer where it **is** relevant, and is also relevant to rustc's `stringify!`, is statement boundaries in the vicinity of braced macro calls.
Rustc's AST pretty-printer produces invalid syntax for statements that begin with a braced macro call:
```rust
macro_rules! stringify_item {
($i:item) => {
stringify!($i)
};
}
macro_rules! repro {
($e:expr) => {
stringify_item!(fn main() { $e + 1; })
};
}
fn main() {
println!("{}", repro!(m! {}));
}
```
**Before this PR:** output is not valid Rust syntax.
```console
fn main() { m! {} + 1; }
```
```console
error: leading `+` is not supported
--> <anon>:1:19
|
1 | fn main() { m! {} + 1; }
| ^ unexpected `+`
|
help: try removing the `+`
|
1 - fn main() { m! {} + 1; }
1 + fn main() { m! {} 1; }
|
```
**After this PR:** valid syntax.
```console
fn main() { (m! {}) + 1; }
```
Uplift various `*Predicate` types into `rustc_type_ir`
Uplifts `ProjectionPredicate`, `ExistentialTraitRef`, `ExistentialProjection`, `TraitPredicate`, `NormalizesTo`, `CoercePredicate`, and `SubtypePredicate`.
Adds `rustc_type_ir_macros`, which semi-duplicates the derive for `TypeVisitable`, `TypeFoldable`, and `Lift`, but in a way that is interner-agnostic.
Moves `rustc_type_ir::trait_ref` to `rustc_type_ir::predicate`. The specific placement of all these structs doesn't matter b/c of glob imports, tho.
Refactoring after the `PlaceValue` addition
I added [`PlaceValue`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_codegen_ssa/mir/place/struct.PlaceValue.html) in #123775, but kept that one line-by-line simple because it touched so many places.
This goes through to add more helpers & docs, and change some `PlaceRef` to `PlaceValue` where the type didn't need to be included.
No behaviour changes -- the codegen is exactly the same.
It is impossible for expr here to be a braced macro call. Expr comes
from `parse_stmt_without_recovery`, in which macro calls are parsed by
`parse_stmt_mac`. See this part:
let kind = if (style == MacStmtStyle::Braces
&& self.token != token::Dot
&& self.token != token::Question)
|| self.token == token::Semi
|| self.token == token::Eof
{
StmtKind::MacCall(P(MacCallStmt { mac, style, attrs, tokens: None }))
} else {
// Since none of the above applied, this is an expression statement macro.
let e = self.mk_expr(lo.to(hi), ExprKind::MacCall(mac));
let e = self.maybe_recover_from_bad_qpath(e)?;
let e = self.parse_expr_dot_or_call_with(e, lo, attrs)?;
let e = self.parse_expr_assoc_with(
0,
LhsExpr::AlreadyParsed { expr: e, starts_statement: false },
)?;
StmtKind::Expr(e)
};
A braced macro call at the head of a statement is always either extended
into ExprKind::Field / MethodCall / Await / Try / Binary, or else
returned as StmtKind::MacCall. We can never get a StmtKind::Expr
containing ExprKind::MacCall containing brace delimiter.
The change to the test is a little goofy because the compiler was
guessing "correctly" before that `falsy! {}` is the condition as opposed
to the else body. But I believe this change is fundamentally correct.
Braced macro invocations in statement position are most often item-like
(`thread_local! {...}`) as opposed to parenthesized macro invocations
which are condition-like (`cfg!(...)`).
