Rollup of 5 pull requests #37678
Merged
Rollup of 5 pull requests #37678
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
Member
eddyb
commented
Nov 10, 2016
eddyb
commented
- Successful merges: [3/n] rustc: unify and simplify managing associated items. #37402, [6/n] rustc: transition HIR function bodies from Block to Expr. #37412, question_mark was stabilized in 1.13 #37661, Document the question mark operator in reference and the book's syntax index #37664, rustc_llvm: Require 3.9 for --link-static #37667
- Failed merges:
Apparently stock Ubuntu 16.04 includes LLVM 3.8 which doesn't have this flag.
[3/n] rustc: unify and simplify managing associated items. _This is part of a series ([prev](rust-lang#37401) | [next](rust-lang#37404)) of patches designed to rework rustc into an out-of-order on-demand pipeline model for both better feature support (e.g. [MIR-based](https://github.com/solson/miri) early constant evaluation) and incremental execution of compiler passes (e.g. type-checking), with beneficial consequences to IDE support as well. If any motivation is unclear, please ask for additional PR description clarifications or code comments._ <hr> `ImplOrTraitItem`/`impl_or_trait_item` have been renamed to `AssociatedItem`/`associated_item`. The common fields from (what used to be) `ty::ImplOrTraitItem`'s variants have been pulled out, leaving only an `AssociatedKind` C-like enum to distinguish between methods, constants and types. The type information has been removed from `AssociatedItem`, and as such the latter can now be computed on-demand from the local HIR map, i.e. an extern-crate-enabled `TraitItem | ImplItem`. It may be moved to HIR in the future, if we intend to start using HIR types cross-crate. `ty::ExplicitSelfCategory` has been moved to `rustc_typeck` and is produced on-demand from the signature of the method, and a `method_has_self_argument` field on `AssociatedItem`, which is used to indicate that the first argument is a sugary "method receiver" and as such, method call syntax can be used.
[6/n] rustc: transition HIR function bodies from Block to Expr. _This is part of a series ([prev](rust-lang#37408) | [next](rust-lang#37676)) of patches designed to rework rustc into an out-of-order on-demand pipeline model for both better feature support (e.g. [MIR-based](https://github.com/solson/miri) early constant evaluation) and incremental execution of compiler passes (e.g. type-checking), with beneficial consequences to IDE support as well. If any motivation is unclear, please ask for additional PR description clarifications or code comments._ <hr> The main change here is that functions and closures both use `Expr` instead of `Block` for their bodies. For closures this actually allows a honest representation of brace-less closure bodies, e.g. `|x| x + 1` is now distinguishable from `|x| { x + 1 }`, therefore this PR is `[syntax-breaking]` (cc @Manishearth). Using `Expr` allows more logic to be shared between constant bodies and function bodies, with some small such changes already part of this PR, and eventually easing rust-lang#35078 and per-body type tables. Incidentally, there used to be some corners cut here and there and as such I had to (re)write divergence tracking for type-checking so that it is capable of understanding basic structured control-flow: ``` rust fn a(x: bool) -> i32 { // match also works (as long as all arms diverge) if x { panic!("true") } else { return 1; } 0 // "unreachable expression" after this PR } ``` And since liveness' "not all control paths return a value" moved to type-checking we can have nice things: ``` rust // before & after: fn b() -> i32 { 0; } // help: consider removing this semicolon // only after this PR fn c() -> i32 { { 0; } } // help: consider removing this semicolon fn d() { let x: i32 = { 0; }; } // help: consider removing this semicolon fn e() { f({ 0; }); } // help: consider removing this semicolon ```
question_mark was stabilized in 1.13
Document the question mark operator in reference and the book's syntax index The question mark operator will be stabilized for the Rust 1.13 release (unfortunately). Even though I don't like the operator, it still should be documented in the syntax index in the book and in the reference. Maybe there are people who also want to change the book's chapters on error handling, depending on their views of what idiomatic error handling is, now that the operator is stable, but I don't want to and I'd prefer to keep this PR focused on the reference and syntax index only. Please also apply this PR to the beta branch of rust.
…paric rustc_llvm: Require 3.9 for --link-static Apparently stock Ubuntu 16.04 includes LLVM 3.8 which doesn't have this flag.
|
@bors r+ p=100 |
|
📌 Commit 3a5b45a has been approved by |
|
r? @Aatch (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
This was referenced Nov 10, 2016
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.