Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

resolve: Support custom attributes when macro modularization is enabled #53053

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Aug 8, 2018

Conversation

petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

Basically, if resolution of a single-segment attribute is a determined error, then we interpret it as a custom attribute.

Since custom attributes are integrated into general macro resolution, feature(custom_attribute) now requires and implicitly enables macro modularization (feature(use_extern_macros)).
Actually, a few other "advanced" macro features now implicitly enable macro modularization too (and one bug was found and fixed in process of enabling it).

The first two commits are preliminary cleanups/refactorings.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @varkor

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Aug 4, 2018
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

r? @alexcrichton

@rust-highfive rust-highfive assigned alexcrichton and unassigned varkor Aug 4, 2018
Copy link
Member

@alexcrichton alexcrichton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great to me, thanks! Just one suspicious thing I'd like to clarify before r+'ing, and otherwise I got tripped up in a few places due to my own lack of in-depth understanding of resolve, so a few minor requests for comments!

@@ -1504,7 +1489,8 @@ impl<'a, 'b> Folder for InvocationCollector<'a, 'b> {
};

if attr.is_some() || !traits.is_empty() {
if !self.cx.ecfg.macros_in_extern_enabled() {
if !self.cx.ecfg.macros_in_extern_enabled() &&
!self.cx.ecfg.custom_attribute_enabled() {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wasn't quite able to discern why this change was needed, you can probably help me out though?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Macros on foreign items are feature gated, and in this place custom attributes look like macro attrs, so without this condition they start requiring feature(macros_in_extern) as well.
I should probably move feature gate checking for feature(macros_in_extern) to some other place in which attribute resolution is already known and we can gate macros, but not other attributes.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok sounds good to me!

@@ -565,7 +548,9 @@ impl<'a, 'b> MacroExpander<'a, 'b> {
_ => unreachable!(),
};

attr::mark_used(&attr);
if let NonMacroAttr { mark_used: false } = *ext {} else {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could a small comment be added here as to why everything else other than this one case gets a mark_used?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Because everything except for NonMacroAttr is a macro that's actually expanded and thus used in the process and NonMacroAttr { mark_used: true } gets mark_used because, well, it says so.

// under us. If this is the case we're making progress so we
// want to flag it as such, and we test this by looking if
// the `attr_id()` method has been changing over time.
if invoc.attr_id() != attr_id_before {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Definitely glad to be rid of this, nice refactoring!

let path = invoc.path().expect("no path for non-macro attr");
match attr_kind {
NonMacroAttrKind::Tool | NonMacroAttrKind::DeriveHelper |
NonMacroAttrKind::Custom if is_attr_invoc => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not personally 100% familiar with resolve, so I'm a little lost here as to why if is_attr_invoc is needed here. Could a comment be added about why it's here and why we'd have a non-attr invocation get resolved to a NonMacroAttr def still?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Anything in macro namespace can resolve to Def::NonMacroAttr!

let x = inline!(); // ERROR expected a macro, found built-in attribute

let binding = (Def::NonMacroAttr(NonMacroAttrKind::Custom),
ty::Visibility::Public, ident.span, Mark::root())
.to_name_binding(self.arenas);
Ok(MacroBinding::Global(binding))
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To confirm, this basically means that it's impossible for an attribute to be "unresolved" now, right? All attributes that otherwise fail to get resolved simply get classified as "this is a custom attribute, it needs #![feature(custom_attributes)]"?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it's impossible for an attribute to be "unresolved" now

It's possible in some rare cases when import resolution/expansion is stuck due to indeterminacy, but otherwise yes, for a single-segment attribute you always get a custom attribute instead of "no resolution" (i.e. the old pre macro modularization behavior is restored).

@@ -8,21 +8,21 @@
// option. This file may not be copied, modified, or distributed
// except according to those terms.

#![feature(tool_attributes)]
#![feature(tool_attributes, custom_attribute)]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh one thing I was wondering, this feature was just added to test that #[rustfmt], typically illegal under #![feature(tool_attributes)], is in fact actually allowed with #![feature(custom_attributes)]?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, rustfmt resolves to a tool module in type namespace, but it resolves to nothing in macro namespace and is thus interpreted as a custom attribute.

Unfortunately, feature gate errors are fatal and stop compilation for some reason, so I had to enable the feature to get other errors, which are reported later.
I should fix this some day.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

if resolution of a single-segment attribute is a determined error, then we interpret it as a custom attribute.

I wasn't quite able to pintpoint where the single-segment clause was here in the resolver, could a test perhaps be added showing that the error for #![unknown] is different than #![unknown::another]?

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

I wasn't quite able to pintpoint where the single-segment clause was here in the resolver

"lexical" in resolve_lexical_macro_path_segment means it's the first segment and is_attr == true should mean it's the last segment, so it's we get to custom attribute fallback only for single-segment attributes.

I'll add comments/asserts/tests for all the review stuff.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Ok this all sounds great to me!

r=me w/ the extra comments/tests

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors r=alexcrichton

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 5, 2018

📌 Commit 3456bec178b159fc03e064dcb9cebef5384fdd84 has been approved by alexcrichton

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 5, 2018
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 6, 2018

⌛ Testing commit 3456bec178b159fc03e064dcb9cebef5384fdd84 with merge 0da4190b512e0ff0610f0c0893f77be11c8ce7e6...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 6, 2018

💔 Test failed - status-appveyor

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Aug 6, 2018
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

One pretty-printing test is failing, will fix.

@petrochenkov petrochenkov added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 6, 2018
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 6, 2018

📌 Commit 5088611 has been approved by alexcrichton

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Aug 6, 2018
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 8, 2018

⌛ Testing commit 5088611 with merge 7a6e62234d1d22af99e101c0aa45148e9abb5aa4...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 8, 2018

💔 Test failed - status-travis

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Aug 8, 2018
@rust-highfive

This comment has been minimized.

@kennytm
Copy link
Member

kennytm commented Aug 8, 2018

@bors retry travis-ci/travis-ci#9696

[01:09:38] fatal: unable to access 'https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/rust-toolstate.git/': Could not resolve host: github.com

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 8, 2018
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 8, 2018

⌛ Testing commit 5088611 with merge ffb09df...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2018
resolve:  Support custom attributes when macro modularization is enabled

Basically, if resolution of a single-segment attribute is a determined error, then we interpret it as a custom attribute.

Since custom attributes are integrated into general macro resolution, `feature(custom_attribute)` now requires and implicitly enables macro modularization (`feature(use_extern_macros)`).
Actually, a few other "advanced" macro features now implicitly enable macro modularization too (and one bug was found and fixed in process of enabling it).

The first two commits are preliminary cleanups/refactorings.
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 8, 2018

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: alexcrichton
Pushing ffb09df to master...

@bors bors merged commit 5088611 into rust-lang:master Aug 8, 2018
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

📣 Toolstate changed by #53053!

Tested on commit ffb09df.
Direct link to PR: #53053

💔 clippy-driver on windows: test-pass → build-fail (cc @Manishearth @llogiq @mcarton @oli-obk, @rust-lang/infra).
💔 clippy-driver on linux: test-pass → build-fail (cc @Manishearth @llogiq @mcarton @oli-obk, @rust-lang/infra).
💔 rls on windows: test-pass → build-fail (cc @nrc, @rust-lang/infra).
💔 rls on linux: test-pass → build-fail (cc @nrc, @rust-lang/infra).

rust-highfive added a commit to rust-lang-nursery/rust-toolstate that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2018
Tested on commit rust-lang/rust@ffb09df.
Direct link to PR: <rust-lang/rust#53053>

💔 clippy-driver on windows: test-pass → build-fail (cc @Manishearth @llogiq @mcarton @oli-obk, @rust-lang/infra).
💔 clippy-driver on linux: test-pass → build-fail (cc @Manishearth @llogiq @mcarton @oli-obk, @rust-lang/infra).
💔 rls on windows: test-pass → build-fail (cc @nrc, @rust-lang/infra).
💔 rls on linux: test-pass → build-fail (cc @nrc, @rust-lang/infra).
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Aug 8, 2018

on it

@oli-obk oli-obk mentioned this pull request Aug 8, 2018
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2018
Update clippy submodule

r? @kennytm

fixes breakage from #53053 (comment)
@kennytm
Copy link
Member

kennytm commented Aug 8, 2018

Note RLS's failure is different from clippy.

[01:17:05] error[E0432]: unresolved import `crate::config::Config`
[01:17:05]   --> tools/rls/src/actions/mod.rs:17:5
[01:17:05]    |
[01:17:05] 17 | use crate::config::Config;
[01:17:05]    |     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `Config` in `config`
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0432]: unresolved import `crate::config::Config`
[01:17:05]   --> tools/rls/src/actions/notifications.rs:15:5
[01:17:05]    |
[01:17:05] 15 | use crate::config::Config;
[01:17:05]    |     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `Config` in `config`
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0432]: unresolved import `crate::config::Config`
[01:17:05]   --> tools/rls/src/build/mod.rs:18:5
[01:17:05]    |
[01:17:05] 18 | use crate::config::Config;
[01:17:05]    |     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `Config` in `config`
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0432]: unresolved import `crate::config::Config`
[01:17:05]   --> tools/rls/src/build/cargo.rs:24:5
[01:17:05]    |
[01:17:05] 24 | use crate::config::Config;
[01:17:05]    |     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `Config` in `config`
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0432]: unresolved import `crate::config::Config`
[01:17:05]   --> tools/rls/src/build/rustc.rs:27:39
[01:17:05]    |
[01:17:05] 27 | use crate::config::{ClippyPreference, Config};
[01:17:05]    |                                       ^^^^^^ no `Config` in `config`
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0432]: unresolved import `crate::config::Config`
[01:17:05]   --> tools/rls/src/cmd.rs:17:5
[01:17:05]    |
[01:17:05] 17 | use crate::config::Config;
[01:17:05]    |     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `Config` in `config`
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0432]: unresolved import `crate::config::Config`
[01:17:05]   --> tools/rls/src/server/mod.rs:17:5
[01:17:05]    |
[01:17:05] 17 | use crate::config::Config;
[01:17:05]    |     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ no `Config` in `config`
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error: cannot determine resolution for the attribute macro `serde`
[01:17:05]    --> tools/rls/src/config.rs:122:3
[01:17:05]     |
[01:17:05] 122 | #[serde(default)]
[01:17:05]     |   ^^^^^
[01:17:05]     |
[01:17:05]     = note: import resolution is stuck, try simplifying macro imports
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0412]: cannot find type `Config` in this scope
[01:17:05]    --> tools/rls/src/config.rs:163:18
[01:17:05]     |
[01:17:05] 163 | impl Default for Config {
[01:17:05]     |                  ^^^^^^ not found in this scope
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0412]: cannot find type `Config` in this scope
[01:17:05]    --> tools/rls/src/config.rs:164:21
[01:17:05]     |
[01:17:05] 164 |     fn default() -> Config {
[01:17:05]     |                     ^^^^^^ not found in this scope
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0422]: cannot find struct, variant or union type `Config` in this scope
[01:17:05]    --> tools/rls/src/config.rs:165:26
[01:17:05]     |
[01:17:05] 165 |         let mut result = Config {
[01:17:05]     |                          ^^^^^^ not found in this scope
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0412]: cannot find type `Config` in this scope
[01:17:05]    --> tools/rls/src/config.rs:195:6
[01:17:05]     |
[01:17:05] 195 | impl Config {
[01:17:05]     |      ^^^^^^ not found in this scope
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error[E0412]: cannot find type `Config` in this scope
[01:17:05]    --> tools/rls/src/config.rs:197:39
[01:17:05]     |
[01:17:05] 197 |     pub fn update(&mut self, mut new: Config) {
[01:17:05]     |                                       ^^^^^^ not found in this scope
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] error: aborting due to 13 previous errors
[01:17:05]
[01:17:05] Some errors occurred: E0412, E0422, E0432.
[01:17:05] For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0412`.
[01:17:05] [RUSTC-TIMING] rls test:false 1.585
[01:17:05] error: Could not compile `rls`.

@nrc
Copy link
Member

nrc commented Aug 8, 2018

With this change I get:

error: cannot determine resolution for the attribute macro `serde`
   --> src/config.rs:122:3
    |
122 | #[serde(default)]
    |   ^^^^^
    |
    = note: import resolution is stuck, try simplifying macro imports

the relevant imports seem to be:

use serde;
use serde::de::{Deserialize, Deserializer, Visitor};
use serde_derive::{Serialize, Deserialize};

and some more context for the error:

#[derive(Clone, Debug, Deserialize, Serialize)]
#[allow(missing_docs)]
#[serde(default)]
pub struct Config {
    ...

Given this is an issue using Serde, I fear this may affect many users once it hits nightly. Is this intentional? Any idea how to fix?

@nrc
Copy link
Member

nrc commented Aug 8, 2018

cc #53144

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nrc
This is an unfortunate consequence of #52234 and appears if macro modularization is enabled (this PR could enable it implicitly if some other features are used - cb64672).

It should be fixable and it must be fixed before #50911 is landed, so I'll send a PR in a few days.

The workaround is to avoid use serde; (that's what causes resolution to stuck) and use ::serde::stuff explicitly, see 6c78d3b for examples.

@nrc
Copy link
Member

nrc commented Aug 9, 2018

Thanks @petrochenkov !

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

8 participants