resolve: Some refactorings in preparation for uniform paths 2.0 #54336

petrochenkov · 2018-09-18T23:34:15Z

The main result is that in-scope resolution performed during macro expansion / import resolution is now consolidated in a single function (fn early_resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope), which can now be used for resolving first import segments as well when uniform paths are enabled.

r? @ghost

petrochenkov · 2018-09-18T23:34:26Z

r? @eddyb

eddyb · 2018-09-19T05:19:14Z

src/librustc_resolve/macros.rs

@@ -591,7 +575,29 @@ impl<'a, 'cl> Resolver<'a, 'cl> {
        //    should be available before the derive is expanded for compatibility.
        //    It's mess in general, so we are being conservative for now.

-        assert!(ns == TypeNS  || ns == MacroNS);
+        enum WhereToResolve<'a> {


I'd almost want this to be named Scope and to replace some of the other infrastructure, like ModuleOrUniformRoot. But we can leave it like this for now.

Yeah, there's still a lot of place for refactoring, e.g. I want to merge this early_resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope with resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope eventually as well.

eddyb · 2018-09-19T05:22:26Z

LGTM overall. This seems to also include a different PR? (the "after derive" bit)
cc @alexcrichton @nikomatsakis

petrochenkov · 2018-09-19T10:42:56Z

The "after derive" (or rather "test/bench") bit is included because it was a temporary restriction for beta, but now it can be removed due to one of the previous commits from this PR (1892126), so it's kinda logically related.

petrochenkov · 2018-09-21T18:22:21Z

r? @alexcrichton who reviewed the previous related PRs

alexcrichton · 2018-09-24T17:17:58Z

@bors: r+

bors · 2018-09-24T17:17:59Z

📌 Commit 28f4b6df2e303b893d4f411c44d8203e21e7890f has been approved by alexcrichton

bors · 2018-09-24T20:07:40Z

🔒 Merge conflict

This pull request and the master branch diverged in a way that cannot be automatically merged. Please rebase on top of the latest master branch, and let the reviewer approve again.

How do I rebase?

Assuming self is your fork and upstream is this repository, you can resolve the conflict following these steps:

git checkout preuni (switch to your branch)
git fetch upstream master (retrieve the latest master)
git rebase upstream/master -p (rebase on top of it)
Follow the on-screen instruction to resolve conflicts (check git status if you got lost).
git push self preuni --force-with-lease (update this PR)

You may also read Git Rebasing to Resolve Conflicts by Drew Blessing for a short tutorial.

Please avoid the "Resolve conflicts" button on GitHub. It uses git merge instead of git rebase which makes the PR commit history more difficult to read.

Sometimes step 4 will complete without asking for resolution. This is usually due to difference between how Cargo.lock conflict is handled during merge and rebase. This is normal, and you should still perform step 5 to update this PR.

Error message

warning: Cannot merge binary files: src/Cargo.lock (HEAD vs. heads/homu-tmp)
Auto-merging src/test/run-pass-fulldeps/macro-crate.rs
Auto-merging src/libsyntax/feature_gate.rs
Auto-merging src/librustc_resolve/macros.rs
Auto-merging src/librustc_resolve/lib.rs
Auto-merging src/Cargo.lock
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in src/Cargo.lock
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.

bors · 2018-09-26T01:25:24Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #54575) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

petrochenkov · 2018-09-26T10:50:08Z

@bors r=alexcrichton

bors · 2018-09-26T10:50:09Z

📌 Commit 0f34a51fb4f9d83f0c0264479448dddd8062265e has been approved by alexcrichton

bors · 2018-09-26T12:47:22Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #53824) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

petrochenkov · 2018-09-27T02:47:03Z

Blocked on #54605 (which will become un-backportable if this PR is landed first).

petrochenkov · 2018-10-04T12:53:41Z

@bors r=alexcrichton

bors · 2018-10-04T12:53:42Z

📌 Commit b6a366e116511712930d5261ad8c4449e2bf481c has been approved by alexcrichton

bors · 2018-10-04T16:34:22Z

🔒 Merge conflict

This pull request and the master branch diverged in a way that cannot be automatically merged. Please rebase on top of the latest master branch, and let the reviewer approve again.

How do I rebase?

Assuming self is your fork and upstream is this repository, you can resolve the conflict following these steps:

git checkout preuni (switch to your branch)
git fetch upstream master (retrieve the latest master)
git rebase upstream/master -p (rebase on top of it)
Follow the on-screen instruction to resolve conflicts (check git status if you got lost).
git push self preuni --force-with-lease (update this PR)

You may also read Git Rebasing to Resolve Conflicts by Drew Blessing for a short tutorial.

Please avoid the "Resolve conflicts" button on GitHub. It uses git merge instead of git rebase which makes the PR commit history more difficult to read.

Sometimes step 4 will complete without asking for resolution. This is usually due to difference between how Cargo.lock conflict is handled during merge and rebase. This is normal, and you should still perform step 5 to update this PR.

Error message

warning: Cannot merge binary files: src/Cargo.lock (HEAD vs. heads/homu-tmp)
Auto-merging src/Cargo.lock
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in src/Cargo.lock
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.

…o macro resolution

…ual left-to-right order

…gment`

…scope resolution function `fn resolve_legacy_scope`/`fn resolve_lexical_macro_path_segment` -> `fn early_resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope`

`NameBinding`s instead of `Def`s

The restrictions were introduced in rust-lang#54277 and no longer necessary now because legacy plugins are now expanded in usual left-to-right order

petrochenkov · 2018-10-05T09:03:50Z

@bors r=alexcrichton

bors · 2018-10-05T09:03:50Z

📌 Commit 0d8e9cd has been approved by alexcrichton

bors · 2018-10-05T12:52:59Z

⌛ Testing commit 0d8e9cd with merge 60c8460...

@ghost

resolve: Some refactorings in preparation for uniform paths 2.0 The main result is that in-scope resolution performed during macro expansion / import resolution is now consolidated in a single function (`fn early_resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope`), which can now be used for resolving first import segments as well when uniform paths are enabled. r? @ghost

bors · 2018-10-05T15:21:40Z

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: alexcrichton
Pushing 60c8460 to master...

rust-highfive assigned eddyb Sep 18, 2018

petrochenkov added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 18, 2018

petrochenkov force-pushed the preuni branch from 3f65f15 to 28f4b6d Compare September 18, 2018 23:50

eddyb reviewed Sep 19, 2018

View reviewed changes

petrochenkov mentioned this pull request Sep 19, 2018

Temporarily prohibit proc macro attributes placed after derives #54277

Merged

rust-highfive assigned alexcrichton and unassigned eddyb Sep 21, 2018

petrochenkov mentioned this pull request Sep 24, 2018

resolve: Do not block derive helper resolutions on single import resolutions #54518

Merged

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 Sep 24, 2018

bors 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-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Sep 24, 2018

petrochenkov force-pushed the preuni branch from 28f4b6d to 0f34a51 Compare September 26, 2018 10:49

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 Sep 26, 2018

bors 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-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Sep 26, 2018

petrochenkov added the S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. label Sep 27, 2018

petrochenkov removed the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Sep 27, 2018

petrochenkov mentioned this pull request Oct 3, 2018

resolve: Disambiguate a subset of conflicts "macro_rules" vs "macro name in module" #54605

Merged

petrochenkov force-pushed the preuni branch from 0f34a51 to b6a366e Compare October 4, 2018 11:49

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-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. labels Oct 4, 2018

bors 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-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Oct 4, 2018

petrochenkov added 8 commits October 5, 2018 11:40

resolve: Integrate inert attributes registererd by legacy plugins int…

dd6347a

…o macro resolution

expansion: Expand attribute macros registered by legacy plugins in us…

7b69088

…ual left-to-right order

resolve: Support value namespace in `fn resolve_lexical_macro_path_se…

05a4681

…gment`

resolve: Merge resolution for macro_rules into the common early in-…

050bd32

…scope resolution function `fn resolve_legacy_scope`/`fn resolve_lexical_macro_path_segment` -> `fn early_resolve_ident_in_lexical_scope`

resolve: Keep more precise traces for expanded macro resolutions

60a1d4e

`NameBinding`s instead of `Def`s

expansion: Remove restriction on use of macro attributes with test/bench

8994c6d

The restrictions were introduced in rust-lang#54277 and no longer necessary now because legacy plugins are now expanded in usual left-to-right order

Reapply the derive helper changes from master

c29fb80

Reapply the macro_rules disambiguation changes from master

0d8e9cd

petrochenkov force-pushed the preuni branch from b6a366e to 0d8e9cd Compare October 5, 2018 09:03

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 Oct 5, 2018

bors merged commit 0d8e9cd into rust-lang:master Oct 5, 2018

petrochenkov deleted the preuni branch June 5, 2019 16:21

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

resolve: Some refactorings in preparation for uniform paths 2.0 #54336

resolve: Some refactorings in preparation for uniform paths 2.0 #54336

petrochenkov commented Sep 18, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 18, 2018

eddyb Sep 19, 2018

petrochenkov Sep 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading

eddyb commented Sep 19, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 19, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 21, 2018

alexcrichton commented Sep 24, 2018

bors commented Sep 24, 2018

bors commented Sep 24, 2018

bors commented Sep 26, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 26, 2018

bors commented Sep 26, 2018

bors commented Sep 26, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 27, 2018

petrochenkov commented Oct 4, 2018

bors commented Oct 4, 2018

bors commented Oct 4, 2018

petrochenkov commented Oct 5, 2018

bors commented Oct 5, 2018

bors commented Oct 5, 2018

bors commented Oct 5, 2018

resolve: Some refactorings in preparation for uniform paths 2.0 #54336

resolve: Some refactorings in preparation for uniform paths 2.0 #54336

Conversation

petrochenkov commented Sep 18, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 18, 2018

eddyb Sep 19, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

petrochenkov Sep 19, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eddyb commented Sep 19, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 19, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 21, 2018

alexcrichton commented Sep 24, 2018

bors commented Sep 24, 2018

bors commented Sep 24, 2018

bors commented Sep 26, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 26, 2018

bors commented Sep 26, 2018

bors commented Sep 26, 2018

petrochenkov commented Sep 27, 2018

petrochenkov commented Oct 4, 2018

bors commented Oct 4, 2018

bors commented Oct 4, 2018

petrochenkov commented Oct 5, 2018

bors commented Oct 5, 2018

bors commented Oct 5, 2018

bors commented Oct 5, 2018

petrochenkov Sep 19, 2018 •

edited

Loading