…ttern for a struct variant

Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>

Compare to `get_git_merge_base`, this doesn't require configuring the upstream remote.

Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>

Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>

Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>

Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>

Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>

Signed-off-by: FedericoBruzzone <federico.bruzzone.i@gmail.com>

Page affected: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/index.html#performance

Changes:

- bulleted conventions
- expanded definitions on terms used
- more accessible language
- merged Sequence and Map performance cost tables

Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>

Since rust-lang#130025, the compiler don't ignore missing_docs when compiling the tests.
But there is now a false positive warning for every `#[test]`

For example, this code
```rust
//! Crate docs

fn just_a_test() {}
```

Would emit this warning when running `cargo test`

```
warning: missing documentation for a constant
 --> src/lib.rs:5:1
  |
4 | #[test]
  | ------- in this procedural macro expansion
5 | fn just_a_test() {}
  | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```

… generated for `#[test]`

So that it doesn't fail with `forbid(missing_docs)`

Fixes rust-lang#130218

…mpiler-errors

Don't suggest adding return type for closures with default return type

Follow up of rust-lang#129223

r? ``@compiler-errors``

…attern-syntax, r=compiler-errors

Suggest the correct pattern syntax on usage of unit variant pattern for a struct variant

Closes rust-lang#126243

I add a suggestion on usage of unit variant pattern for a struct variant.

Clarify documentation labelling and definitions for std::collections

Page affected: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/index.html#performance

Changes:
- bulleted conventions
- expanded definitions on terms used
- more accessible language
- more informative headings

…r-errors

Report the `note` when specified in `diagnostic::on_unimplemented`

Before this PR the `note` field was completely ignored for some reason, now it is shown (I think) correctly during the hir typechecking phase.

1. Report the `note` when specified in `diagnostic::on_unimplemented`
2. Added a test for unimplemented trait diagnostic
3. Added a test for custom unimplemented trait diagnostic

Close rust-lang#130084

P.S. This is my first PR to rustc.

…bzol,RalfJung

refactor merge base logic and fix `x fmt`

When remote upstream is not configured, using [get_git_modified_files](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/38e3a5771cefc9362976a605549f8b04d5707311/src/tools/build_helper/src/git.rs#L114) to find modified files fails because [get_rust_lang_rust_remote](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/38e3a5771cefc9362976a605549f8b04d5707311/src/tools/build_helper/src/git.rs#L46-L48) can not resolve "rust-lang/rust" from the git output. The changes in this PR makes bootstrap to find the latest bors commit, treating it as the "closest upstream commit" so that the change tracker logic can use it to find the diffs.

In addition, [skips formatting](rust-lang@e392454) if there are no modified files.

Fixes rust-lang#130147

Map `WSAEDQUOT` to `ErrorKind::FilesystemQuotaExceeded`

cc rust-lang#86442

As summarized in rust-lang#130190, there seems to be a consensus that this should be done.

…LENAME, r=ChrisDenton

Map `ERROR_CANT_RESOLVE_FILENAME` to `ErrorKind::FilesystemLoop`

cc rust-lang#86442

As summarized in rust-lang#130188, there seems to be a consensus that this should be done.

Fix false positive with `missing_docs` and `#[test]`

Since rust-lang#130025, the compiler don't ignore missing_docs when compiling the tests. But there is now a false positive warning for every `#[test]`

For example, this code
```rust
//! Crate docs

fn just_a_test() {}
```

Would emit this warning when running `cargo test`

```
warning: missing documentation for a constant
 --> src/lib.rs:5:1
  |
4 | #[test]
  | ------- in this procedural macro expansion
5 | fn just_a_test() {}
  | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
```

…enyukang

Make SearchPath::new public

I'm writing a tool that uses `rustc_interface`, and would like to construct `SearchPath` with its `new` method.

As all three fields in `SearchPath` are public anyway, the proposed change should not change the privacy or encapsulation of the struct.