Rollup of 7 pull requests #112102
Merged
Rollup of 7 pull requests #112102
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
…lias Before: ``` thread 'main' panicked at 'no entry found for key', builder.rs:110:30 ``` After: ``` thread 'main' panicked at 'missing crate for path library', check.rs:89:26 ```
This is useful for profiling metadata generation. This comes very close to removing all_krates, but doesn't quite - there's one last usage left in `doc`.
This fixes the panic from the previous commit.
Previously `description` only supported `Testing` and `Benchmarking`, and `msg` gave weird results for `doc` (it would say `Docing`).
Previously they were using `all_krates` and various hacks to determine which crates to document. Switch them to `crate_or_deps` so `ShouldRun` tells them which crate to document instead of having to guess. This also makes a few other refactors: - Remove the now unused `all_krates`; new code should only use `crate_or_deps`. - Add tests for documenting Std - Remove the unnecessary `run_cargo_rustdoc_for` closure so that we only run cargo once - Give a more helpful error message when documenting a no_std target - Use `builder.msg` in the Steps instead of `builder.info`
and document why the single remaining place can't switch
- Switch from `cargo rustdoc` to `cargo doc` This allows passing `-p` to multiple packages. - Remove `OsStr` support It doesn't work with RUSTDOCFLAGS, and we don't support non-utf8 paths anyway. - Pass `-p std` for each crate in the standard library By default cargo only documents the top-level crate, which is `sysroot` and has no docs.
Only make the use-dot-operator-to-call-method suggestion, but do not double down and use the recovered type to perform method call typechecking as it will produce confusing diagnostics on the "fixed" code.
fix comment on Allocator trait fixes rust-lang#107040
…cked, r=WaffleLapkin
Uplift `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` lint
This PR aims at uplifting the `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` lint into two lints.
## `invalid_from_utf8_unchecked`
(deny-by-default)
The `invalid_from_utf8_unchecked` lint checks for calls to `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked` and `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked_mut` with an invalid UTF-8 literal.
### Example
```rust
unsafe {
std::str::from_utf8_unchecked(b"cl\x82ippy");
}
```
### Explanation
Creating such a `str` would result in undefined behavior as per documentation for `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked` and `std::str::from_utf8_unchecked_mut`.
## `invalid_from_utf8`
(warn-by-default)
The `invalid_from_utf8` lint checks for calls to `std::str::from_utf8` and `std::str::from_utf8_mut` with an invalid UTF-8 literal.
### Example
```rust
std::str::from_utf8(b"ru\x82st");
```
### Explanation
Trying to create such a `str` would always return an error as per documentation for `std::str::from_utf8` and `std::str::from_utf8_mut`.
-----
Mostly followed the instructions for uplifting a clippy lint described here: rust-lang#99696 (review)
````@rustbot```` label: +I-lang-nominated
r? compiler
-----
For Clippy:
changelog: Moves: Uplifted `clippy::invalid_utf8_in_unchecked` into rustc
fix: dedup `static_candidates` before report Fixes rust-lang#103646 `record_static_candidate` had been executed twice, resulting in the presence of two identical `CandidateSource::Trait(Cat)` in static_candidates. This PR aims to deduplication the `static_candidates` list, allowing it to execute `suggest_associated_call_syntax` properly.
bootstrap: Various Step refactors
This ended up being a bunch of only somewhat related changes, sorry 😓 on the bright side, they're all fairly small and well-commented in the commit messages.
- Document `ShouldRun::crates`
- Switch Steps from crates to crate_or_deps where possible
and document why the single remaining place can't switch
- Switch doc::{Std, Rustc} to `crate_or_deps`
Previously they were using `all_krates` and various hacks to determine
which crates to document. Switch them to `crate_or_deps` so `ShouldRun`
tells them which crate to document instead of having to guess.
This also makes a few other refactors:
- Remove the now unused `all_krates`; new code should only use
`crate_or_deps`.
- Add tests for documenting Std
- Remove the unnecessary `run_cargo_rustdoc_for` closure so that we only
run cargo once
- Give a more helpful error message when documenting a no_std target
- Use `builder.msg` in the Steps instead of `builder.info`
- Extend `msg` and `description` to work with any subcommand
Previously `description` only supported `Testing` and `Benchmarking`,
and `msg` gave weird results for `doc` (it would say `Docing`).
- Add a `make_run_crates` function and use it Rustc and Std
This fixes the panic from the previous commit.
- Allow checking individual crates
This is useful for profiling metadata generation.
This comes very close to removing all_krates, but doesn't quite -
there's one last usage left in `doc`. This is fixed in a later commit.
- Give a more helpful error when calling `cargo_crates_in_set` for an alias
Before:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'no entry found for key', builder.rs:110:30
```
After:
```
thread 'main' panicked at 'missing crate for path library', check.rs:89:26
```
`EarlyBinder::new` -> `EarlyBinder::bind` for consistency with `Binder::bind`. it may make sense to also add `EarlyBinder::dummy` in places where we know that no parameters exist, but I left that out of this PR. r? `@jackh726` `@kylematsuda`
…lor-9, r=notriddle Migrate GUI colors test to original CSS color format Follow-up of rust-lang#111459. The `browser-ui-test` update is a fix when converting the alpha value to hex format. More information [here](GuillaumeGomez/browser-UI-test#511). r? ````@notriddle````
Don't typecheck recovered method call from suggestion
Only make the use-dot-operator-to-call-method suggestion, but do not double down and use the recovered type to perform method call typechecking as it will produce confusing diagnostics relevant for the *fixed* code.
### Code Sample
```rust
struct Client;
impl Client {
fn post<T: std::ops::Add>(&self, _: T, _: T) {}
}
fn f() {
let c = Client;
post(c, ());
}
```
### Before This PR
```
error[[E0277]](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/error_codes/E0277.html): cannot add `()` to `()`
--> src/lib.rs:9:5
|
9 | post(c, ());
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ no implementation for `() + ()`
|
= help: the trait `Add` is not implemented for `()`
note: required by a bound in `Client::post`
--> src/lib.rs:4:16
|
4 | fn post<T: std::ops::Add>(&self, _: T, _: T) {}
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `Client::post`
error[[E0061]](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/error_codes/E0061.html): this function takes 2 arguments but 1 argument was supplied
--> src/lib.rs:9:5
|
9 | post(c, ());
| ^^^^ an argument of type `()` is missing
|
note: method defined here
--> src/lib.rs:4:8
|
4 | fn post<T: std::ops::Add>(&self, _: T, _: T) {}
| ^^^^ ----- ---- ----
help: provide the argument
|
9 | post((), ())(c, ());
| ++++++++
error[[E0425]](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/error_codes/E0425.html): cannot find function `post` in this scope
--> src/lib.rs:9:5
|
9 | post(c, ());
| ^^^^ not found in this scope
|
help: use the `.` operator to call the method `post` on `&Client`
|
9 - post(c, ());
9 + c.post(());
|
Some errors have detailed explanations: E0061, E0277, E0425.
For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0061`.
```
### After This PR
```
error[E0425]: cannot find function `post` in this scope
--> tests/ui/typeck/issue-106929.rs:9:5
|
9 | post(c, ());
| ^^^^ not found in this scope
|
help: use the `.` operator to call the method `post` on `&Client`
|
9 - post(c, ());
9 + c.post(());
|
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0425`.
```
Fixes rust-lang#106929.
rustbot
added
A-testsuite
rustbot
added
T-libs
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=7 |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR: previous master: 3266c36624 In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (a9251b6): comparison URL. Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Max RSS (memory usage)ResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 643.826s -> 644.295s (0.07%) |
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# 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.
Successful merges:
clippy::invalid_utf8_in_uncheckedlint #111543 (Upliftclippy::invalid_utf8_in_uncheckedlint)static_candidatesbefore report #111872 (fix: dedupstatic_candidatesbefore report)EarlyBinder::new->EarlyBinder::bind#112060 (EarlyBinder::new->EarlyBinder::bind)r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup