Rollup of 4 pull requests #97349
Closed
Rollup of 4 pull requests #97349
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
(with an intermediate raw ptr, not a direct transmute)
With `ignore (rust)` rather than `ignore (pseudo-Rust)` my editor highlights the code in the block, which is nicer. Signed-off-by: David Wood <[email protected]>
Adds a new `fluent_messages` macro which performs compile-time
validation of the compiler's Fluent resources (i.e. that the resources
parse and don't multiply define the same messages) and generates
constants that make using those messages in diagnostics more ergonomic.
For example, given the following invocation of the macro..
```ignore (rust)
fluent_messages! {
typeck => "./typeck.ftl",
}
```
..where `typeck.ftl` has the following contents..
```fluent
typeck-field-multiply-specified-in-initializer =
field `{$ident}` specified more than once
.label = used more than once
.label-previous-use = first use of `{$ident}`
```
...then the macro parse the Fluent resource, emitting a diagnostic if it
fails to do so, and will generate the following code:
```ignore (rust)
pub static DEFAULT_LOCALE_RESOURCES: &'static [&'static str] = &[
include_str!("./typeck.ftl"),
];
mod fluent_generated {
mod typeck {
pub const field_multiply_specified_in_initializer: DiagnosticMessage =
DiagnosticMessage::fluent("typeck-field-multiply-specified-in-initializer");
pub const field_multiply_specified_in_initializer_label_previous_use: DiagnosticMessage =
DiagnosticMessage::fluent_attr(
"typeck-field-multiply-specified-in-initializer",
"previous-use-label"
);
}
}
```
When emitting a diagnostic, the generated constants can be used as
follows:
```ignore (rust)
let mut err = sess.struct_span_err(
span,
fluent::typeck::field_multiply_specified_in_initializer
);
err.span_default_label(span);
err.span_label(
previous_use_span,
fluent::typeck::field_multiply_specified_in_initializer_label_previous_use
);
err.emit();
```
Signed-off-by: David Wood <[email protected]>
Use new typed Fluent identifiers for the "missing type parameters" diagnostic in the typeck crate which was manually creating `DiagnosticMessage`s previously. Signed-off-by: David Wood <[email protected]>
…ylan-DPC Lifetime variance fixes for rustdoc rust-lang#97287 migrates rustc to a `Ty` type that is invariant over its lifetime `'tcx`, so I need to fix a bunch of places that assume that `Ty<'a>` and `Ty<'b>` can be unified by shortening both to some common lifetime. This is doable, since everything is already `'tcx`, so all this PR does is be a bit more explicit that elided lifetimes are actually `'tcx`. Split out from rust-lang#97287 so the rustdoc team can review independently.
…, r=davidtwco
Parse expression after `else` as a condition if followed by `{`
Fixes rust-lang#49361.
Two things:
1. This wording needs help. I can never find a natural/intuitive phrasing when I write diagnostics 😅
2. Do we even want to show the "wrap in braces" case? I would assume most of the time the "add an `if`" case is the right one.
explain how to turn integers into fn ptrs (with an intermediate raw ptr, not a direct transmute) Direct int2ptr transmute, under the semantics I am imagining, will produce a ptr with "invalid" provenance that is invalid to deref or call. We cannot give it the same semantics as int2ptr casts since those do [something complicated](https://www.ralfj.de/blog/2022/04/11/provenance-exposed.html). To my great surprise, that is already what the example in the `transmute` docs does. :) I still added a comment to say that that part is important, and I added a section explicitly talking about this to the `fn()` type docs. With rust-lang/miri#2151, Miri will start complaining about direct int-to-fnptr transmutes (in the sense that it is UB to call the resulting pointer).
…mpile-time-validation, r=oli-obk
macros: introduce `fluent_messages` macro
Adds a new `fluent_messages` macro which performs compile-time validation of the compiler's Fluent resources (i.e. that the resources parse and don't multiply define the same messages) and generates constants that make using those messages in diagnostics more ergonomic.
For example, given the following invocation of the macro..
```rust
fluent_messages! {
typeck => "./typeck.ftl",
}
```
..where `typeck.ftl` has the following contents..
```fluent
typeck-field-multiply-specified-in-initializer =
field `{$ident}` specified more than once
.label = used more than once
.label-previous-use = first use of `{$ident}`
```
...then the macro parse the Fluent resource, emitting a diagnostic if it fails to do so...
```text
error: could not parse Fluent resource
--> $DIR/test.rs:35:28
|
LL | missing_message => "./missing-message.ftl",
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= help: see additional errors emitted
error: expected a message field for "missing-message"
--> ./missing-message.ftl:1:1
|
1 | missing-message =
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
```
...or generating the following code if it succeeds:
```rust
pub static DEFAULT_LOCALE_RESOURCES: &'static [&'static str] = &[
include_str!("./typeck.ftl"),
];
mod fluent_generated {
mod typeck {
pub const field_multiply_specified_in_initializer: DiagnosticMessage =
DiagnosticMessage::fluent("typeck-field-multiply-specified-in-initializer");
pub const field_multiply_specified_in_initializer_label_previous_use: DiagnosticMessage =
DiagnosticMessage::fluent_attr(
"typeck-field-multiply-specified-in-initializer",
"previous-use-label"
);
}
}
```
When emitting a diagnostic, the generated constants can be used as follows:
```rust
let mut err = sess.struct_span_err(
span,
fluent::typeck::field_multiply_specified_in_initializer
);
err.span_label(
span,
fluent::typeck::field_multiply_specified_in_initializer_label
);
err.span_label(
previous_use_span,
fluent::typeck::field_multiply_specified_in_initializer_label_previous_use
);
err.emit();
```
I'd like to reduce the verbosity of referring to labels/notes/helps with this scheme (though it wasn't much better before), but I'll leave that for a follow-up.
r? `@oli-obk`
cc `@pvdrz` `@compiler-errors`
rustbot
added
T-compiler
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
|
📌 Commit 67adf38 has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
⌛ Testing commit 67adf38 with merge e374de9e426d886edcea5da36ee10dba4dafd2fd... |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
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.
Successful merges:
elseas a condition if followed by{#97298 (Parse expression afterelseas a condition if followed by{)fluent_messagesmacro #97327 (macros: introducefluent_messagesmacro )Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup