Rustup #12813
Merged
Rustup #12813
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Some hir cleanups It seemed odd to not put `AnonConst` in the arena, compared with the other types that we did put into an arena. This way we can also give it a `Span` without growing a lot of other HIR data structures because of the extra field. r? compiler
Stabilize exclusive_range_pattern (v2) This PR is identical to #124459, which was approved and merged but then removed from master by a force-push due to a [CI bug](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/242791-t-infra/topic/ci.20broken.3F). r? ghost Original PR description: --- Stabilization report: rust-lang/rust#37854 (comment) FCP: rust-lang/rust#37854 (comment) Stabilization was blocked by a lint that was merged here: #118879 Documentation PR is here: rust-lang/reference#1484 `@rustbot` label +F-exclusive_range_pattern +T-lang
They can just be written as `use rustc_foo::bar`, which is far more standard. (I didn't even know that a `crate::` prefix was valid.)
Remove braces when fixing a nested use tree into a single item [Back in 2019](rust-lang/rust#56645) I added rustfix support for the `unused_imports` lint, to automatically remove them when running `cargo fix`. For the most part this worked great, but when removing all but one childs of a nested use tree it turned `use foo::{Unused, Used}` into `use foo::{Used}`. This is slightly annoying, because it then requires you to run `rustfmt` to get `use foo::Used`. This PR automatically removes braces and the surrouding whitespace when all but one child of a nested use tree are unused. To get it done I had to add the span of the nested use tree to the AST, and refactor a bit the code I wrote back then. A thing I noticed is, there doesn't seem to be any `//@ run-rustfix` test for fixing the `unused_imports` lint. I created a test in `tests/suggestions` (is that the right directory?) that for now tests just what I added in the PR. I can followup in a separate PR to add more tests for fixing `unused_lints`. This PR is best reviewed commit-by-commit.
Generic `NonZero` post-stabilization changes. Tracking issue: rust-lang/rust#120257 r? ``@dtolnay``
…ler-errors Simplify `use crate::rustc_foo::bar` occurrences. They can just be written as `use rustc_foo::bar`, which is far more standard. (I didn't even know that a `crate::` prefix was valid.) r? ``@eholk``
`InferCtxt::next_{ty,const}_var*` all take an origin, but the
`param_def_id` is almost always `None`. This commit changes them to just
take a `Span` and build the origin within the method, and adds new
methods for the rare cases where `param_def_id` might not be `None`.
This avoids a lot of tedious origin building.
Specifically:
- next_ty_var{,_id_in_universe,_in_universe}: now take `Span` instead of
`TypeVariableOrigin`
- next_ty_var_with_origin: added
- next_const_var{,_in_universe}: takes Span instead of ConstVariableOrigin
- next_const_var_with_origin: added
- next_region_var, next_region_var_in_universe: these are unchanged,
still take RegionVariableOrigin
The API inconsistency (ty/const vs region) seems worth it for the
large conciseness improvements.
Use fewer origins when creating type variables. To reduce lots of repetitive boilerplate code. Details in the individual commit messages. r? ``@lcnr``
Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - #124551 (Add benchmarks for `impl Debug for str`) - #124915 (`rustc_target` cleanups) - #124918 (Eliminate some `FIXME(lcnr)` comments) - #124927 (opt-dist: use xz2 instead of xz crate) - #124936 (analyse visitor: build proof tree in probe) - #124943 (always use `GenericArgsRef`) - #124955 (Use fewer origins when creating type variables.) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
…rister Make `Ty::builtin_deref` just return a `Ty` Nowhere in the compiler are we using the mutability part of the `TyAndMut` that we used to return.
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors r+ |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test |
This was referenced May 16, 2024
Merged
Draft
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
r? @ghost
changelog: None