The point of these is to be seen lexically in the docs, so they should always be passed as the correct literal, not as an expression.

(Otherwise we could just compute `Min`/`Max` from `BITS`, for example.)

We currently provide wrong suggestions and unhelpful errors on closure
bodies with braces missing. For example, given the following code:

```
fn main() {
    let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
}
```

the current output is like this:

```
error: expected expression, found `)`
 --> ./main.rs:2:30
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                              ^ expected expression

error: closure bodies that contain statements must be surrounded by braces
 --> ./main.rs:2:25
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                         ^
3 | }
  | ^
  |

...

help: try adding braces
  |
2 ~     let _x = Box::new(|x| {x+1;);
3 ~ }}

...

error: expected `;`, found `}`
 --> ./main.rs:2:32
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                                ^ help: add `;` here
3 | }
  | - unexpected token

error: aborting due to 3 previous errors
```

This commit allows outputting correct suggestions and errors. The above
code would output like this:

```
error: closure bodies that contain statements must be surrounded by braces
 --> ./main.rs:2:25
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                         ^    ^
  |
note: statement found outside of a block
 --> ./main.rs:2:29
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                          ---^ this `;` turns the preceding closure into a statement
  |                          |
  |                          this expression is a statement because of the trailing semicolon
note: the closure body may be incorrectly delimited
 --> ./main.rs:2:23
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                       ^^^^^^ - ...but likely you meant the closure to end here
  |                       |
  |                       this is the parsed closure...
help: try adding braces
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x| {x+1;});
  |                           +    +

error: aborting due to previous error
```

As reported in sunfishcode/is-terminal#18, there are situations where
`GetFileInformationByHandleEx` can write a file name length that is
longer than the provided buffer. To avoid deferencing memory past the
end of the buffer, use a bounds-checked function to form a slice to
the buffer and handle the out-of-bounds case.

This ports the fix from sunfishcode/is-terminal#19 to std's `is_terminal`
implementation.

Consider `tests/ui/const-generics/generic_const_exprs/issue-102768.stderr`,
the error message where it gives additional notes about where the associated
type is defined, and how the dead code lint doesn't have an article,
like in `tests/ui/lint/dead-code/issue-85255.stderr`. They don't have
articles, so it seems unnecessary to have one here.

Restore behavior when primary bundle is missing

Fixes rust-lang#106755 by restoring some of the behavior prior to rust-lang#106427

Still, I have no idea how this debug assertion can even hit while using `en-US` as primary  bundle.

r? ``@davidtwco``

…er-errors

Add check for invalid #[macro_export] arguments

Resolves rust-lang#107231
Sorry if I made something wrong, this is my first contribution to the repo.

…t, r=spastorino

Add test for bad cast with deferred projection equality

1. Unification during coercion (`Coerce::unify`) needs to consider deferred projection obligations (at least pass over them with `predicate_may_hold` or something, to disqualify any totally wrong unifications) -- otherwise, we'll shallowly consider `<u8 as Add>::Output` and `char` as coercible during `FnCtxt::try_coerce`, which will fail later when the nested obligations are registered and processed.

2. Cast checking needs to be able to structurally normalize types so it sees `u8` instead of `<u8 as Add>::Output`. Otherwise it'll always consider the latter as part of a non-primitive cast. Currently `FnCtxt::normalize` doesn't do anything useful here, interestingly.

I tried looking into both of these and it's not immediately clear where to refactor existing typeck code to fix this (at least the latter), but I'm gonna commit a test for it at least so we don't forget. This is one of the issues that's keeping us from building larger projects.

Require `literal`s for some `(u)int_impl!` parameters

The point of these is to be seen *lexically* in the docs, so they should always be passed as the correct literal, not as an expression.

(Otherwise we could just compute `Min`/`Max` from `BITS`, for example.)

r? Nilstrieb

…, r=compiler-errors

Fix ICE in 'duplicate diagnostic item' diagnostic

Not sure how to add this in a test; I found it by mistakenly running `cargo fix --lib -p std` rather than `x fix` at the root.

…rmed-closure, r=davidtwco

parser: provide better suggestions and errors on closures with braces missing

We currently provide wrong suggestions and unhelpful errors on closure bodies with braces missing.

For example, given the following code:

```rust
fn main() {
    let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
}
```

the current output is:

```
error: expected expression, found `)`
 --> ./main.rs:2:30
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                              ^ expected expression

error: closure bodies that contain statements must be surrounded by braces
 --> ./main.rs:2:25
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                         ^
3 | }
  | ^
  |
note: statement found outside of a block
 --> ./main.rs:2:29
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                          ---^ this `;` turns the preceding closure into a statement
  |                          |
  |                          this expression is a statement because of the trailing semicolon
note: the closure body may be incorrectly delimited
 --> ./main.rs:2:23
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                       ^^^^^^ this is the parsed closure...
3 | }
  | - ...but likely you meant the closure to end here
help: try adding braces
  |
2 ~     let _x = Box::new(|x| {x+1;);
3 ~ }}
  |

error: expected `;`, found `}`
 --> ./main.rs:2:32
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                                ^ help: add `;` here
3 | }
  | - unexpected token

error: aborting due to 3 previous errors
```

We got 3 errors, but all but the second are unnecessary or just wrong.

This commit allows outputting correct suggestions and errors. The above code would output like this:

```
error: closure bodies that contain statements must be surrounded by braces
 --> ./main.rs:2:25
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                         ^    ^
  |
note: statement found outside of a block
 --> ./main.rs:2:29
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                          ---^ this `;` turns the preceding closure into a statement
  |                          |
  |                          this expression is a statement because of the trailing semicolon
note: the closure body may be incorrectly delimited
 --> ./main.rs:2:23
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x|x+1;);
  |                       ^^^^^^ - ...but likely you meant the closure to end here
  |                       |
  |                       this is the parsed closure...
help: try adding braces
  |
2 |     let _x = Box::new(|x| {x+1;});
  |                           +    +

error: aborting due to previous error
```

Fixes rust-lang#107959.

r? diagnostics

…l-file-length, r=ChrisDenton

Fix `is_terminal`'s handling of long paths on Windows.

As reported in sunfishcode/is-terminal#18, there are situations where `GetFileInformationByHandleEx` can write a file name length that is longer than the provided buffer. To avoid deferencing memory past the end of the buffer, use a bounds-checked function to form a slice to the buffer and handle the out-of-bounds case.

This ports the fix from sunfishcode/is-terminal#19 to std's `is_terminal` implementation.

…ticle, r=compiler-errors

diagnostics: remove inconsistent English article "this" from E0107

Consider [`tests/ui/const-generics/generic_const_exprs/issue-102768.stderr`][issue-102768.stderr], the error message where it gives additional notes about where the associated type is defined, and how the dead code lint doesn't have an article, like in [`tests/ui/lint/dead-code/issue-85255.stderr`][issue-85255.stderr]. They don't have articles, so it seems unnecessary to have one here.

[issue-102768.stderr]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/07c993eba8b76eae497e98433ae075b00f01be10/tests/ui/const-generics/generic_const_exprs/issue-102768.stderr
[issue-85255.stderr]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/07c993eba8b76eae497e98433ae075b00f01be10/tests/ui/lint/dead-code/issue-85255.stderr