Account for version number in NtIdent hack
Issue #74616 tracks a backwards-compatibility hack for certain macros.
This has is implemented by hard-coding the filenames and macro names of
certain code that we want to continue to compile.
However, the initial implementation of the hack was based on the
directory structure when building the crate from its repository (e.g.
`js-sys/src/lib.rs`). When the crate is build as a dependency, it will
include a version number from the clone from the cargo registry (e.g.
`js-sys-0.3.17/src/lib.rs`), which would fail the check.
This commit modifies the backwards-compatibility hack to check that
desired crate name (`js-sys` or `time-macros-impl`) is a prefix of the
proper part of the path.
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76070#issuecomment-687215646
for more details.
Disable use of `--eh-frame-hdr` on wasm32.
Set wasm32's `TargetOptions::eh_frame_header` to false so that we don't pass `--eh-frame-hdr` to `wasm-ld`, which doesn't support that flag.
r? @alexcrichton
CDB doesn't care that you're using static_cast between unrelated types.
VS(C) does. These should've been reinterpret_cast or C casts.
Cast is from e.g. `u8*` to `tuple<$T1, $T2>*`
rename MaybeUninit slice methods
The `first` methods conceptually point to the whole slice, not just its first element, so rename them to be consistent with the raw ptr methods on ref-slices.
Also, do the equivalent of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/76047 for the slice reference getters, and make them part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/63569 (so far they somehow had no tracking issue).
* first_ptr -> slice_as_ptr
* first_ptr_mut -> slice_as_mut_ptr
* slice_get_ref -> slice_assume_init_ref
* slice_get_mut -> slice_assume_init_mut
I believe the documentation is currently a little misleading.
For example, in the docs for `filter()`:
> If the closure returns `false`, it will try again, and call the closure on
> the next element, seeing if it passes the test.
This kind of implies that if the closure returns true then we *don't* "try
again" and no further elements are considered. In actuality that's not the
case, every element is tried regardless of what happened with the previous
element.
This change tries to clarify that by removing the uses of "try again"
altogether.
Enable some of profiler tests on Windows-gnu
CC https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/61266
Because of force-push GitHub didn't let me reopen https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/75184
Because of the GCC miscompilation, generated binaries either segfault or `.profraw` is malformed. Clang works fine but we can't use it on the CI.
However we can still test the IR for the proper instrumentation so let's do it.
Move jointness censoring to proc_macro
Proc-macro API currently exposes jointness in `Punct` tokens. That is,
`+` in `+one` is **non** joint.
Our lexer produces jointness info for all tokens, so we need to censor
it *somewhere*
Previously we did this in a lexer, but it makes more sense to do this
in a proc-macro server.
r? @petrochenkov
inliner: Check for codegen fn attributes compatibility
* Check for target features compatibility
* Check for no_sanitize attribute compatibility
Fixes#76259.
Fix intra-doc links on pub re-exports
Partial fix for https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/76073 - This removes the incorrect error, but doesn't show the documentation anywhere.
r? @GuillaumeGomez
Remove disambiguators from intra doc link text
Closes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/65354.
r? @Manishearth
The commits are mostly atomic, but there might be some mix between them here and there. I recommend reading 'refactor ItemLink' and 'refactor RenderedLink' on their own though, lots of churn without any logic changes.
Refactor byteorder to std in rustc_middle
Use std::io::{Read, Write} and {to, from}_{le, be}_bytes methods in
order to remove byteorder from librustc_middle's dependency graph.
Add a regression test for issue-72793
Adds a regression test for #72793, which is fixed by #75443. Note that this won't close the issue as the snippet still shows ICE with `-Zmir-opt-level=2`. But it makes sense to add a test anyway.
do not apply DerefMut on union field
This implements the part of [RFC 2514](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/2514-union-initialization-and-drop.md) about `DerefMut`. Unlike described in the RFC, we only apply this warning specifically when doing `DerefMut` of a `ManuallyDrop` field; that is really the case we are worried about here.
@matthewjasper suggested I patch `convert_place_derefs_to_mutable` and `convert_place_op_to_mutable` for this, but I could not find anything to do in `convert_place_op_to_mutable` and this is sufficient to make the test pass. However, maybe there are some other cases this misses? I have no familiarity with this code.
This is a breaking change *in theory*, if someone used `ManuallyDrop<T>` in a union field and relied on automatic `DerefMut`. But on stable this means `T: Copy`, so the `ManuallyDrop` is rather pointless.
Cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/55149
