Ensure that the argument to static_assert is a bool
#55945
Conversation
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
| @@ -16,6 +16,6 @@ macro_rules! static_assert { | |||
| // Use the bool to access an array such that if the bool is false, the access | |||
| // is out-of-bounds. | |||
| #[allow(dead_code)] | |||
| static $name: () = [()][!$test as usize]; | |||
| static $name: () = [()][!($test: bool) as usize]; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You could use #[allow_internal_unstable] instead, maybe?
Also, has the const _ = ...; proposal been implemented?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also, has the const _ = ...; proposal been implemented?
It has been implemented, but it does not cope well with allow_internal_unstable, because the crate using static_assert won't have the feature for _ items enabled, thus causing an error about item with name _ being declared multiple times
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm very confused, how could that even happen?!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't know, I presume it's because we now do have multiple items with the name _, but the multiple items with same name check doesn't know about allow_internal_unstable and thus assumes the relevant feature gate (for _ names) isn't active.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But the implementation should be using gensym so that should be impossible?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@oli-obk No, because that won't preserve the association. Anyway, gensyms are just an implementation hack, you don't actually need a name for these items.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can refactor AST and HIR to have Option<Symbol> for their items' names
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That seems overkill for now, and also, we can move this into an issue and land a simpler version of this patch.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
by simpler you mean keeping the actual names for the assert items?
oli-obk
force-pushed
the
static_assert_arg_type
branch
from
a9018ea
to
d47b66b
Compare
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
|
@oli-obk Looks pretty cool, if you can get it to work |
oli-obk
force-pushed
the
static_assert_arg_type
branch
from
d47b66b
to
65e6fdb
Compare
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 65e6fdb has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
…ichaelwoerister Ensure that the argument to `static_assert` is a `bool` cc @eddyb
Rollup of 14 pull requests Successful merges: - #55767 (Disable some pretty-printers when gdb is rust-enabled) - #55838 (Fix #[cfg] for step impl on ranges) - #55869 (Add std::iter::unfold) - #55945 (Ensure that the argument to `static_assert` is a `bool`) - #56022 (When popping in CTFE, perform validation before jumping to next statement to have a better span for the error) - #56048 (Add rustc_codegen_ssa to sysroot) - #56091 (Fix json output in the self-profiler) - #56097 (Fix invalid bitcast taking bool out of a union represented as a scalar) - #56116 (ci: Download clang/lldb from tarballs) - #56120 (Add unstable Literal::subspan().) - #56154 (Pass additional linker flags when targeting Fuchsia) - #56162 (std::str Adapt documentation to reality) - #56163 ([master] Backport 1.30.1 release notes) - #56168 (Fix the tracking issue for hash_raw_entry) Failed merges: r? @ghost
cc @eddyb