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

Implement use<> formatting in rustfmt #126754

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 24, 2024

Conversation

compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

This PR implements formatting for precise-capturing use<> syntax as proposed in #126753.

The syntax is implemented as-if the use<> bound were a trait bound but with the use keyword as its path segment identifier.

I opted to develop this in the rust-lang/rust tree since I'm not certain when the next rustfmt subtree sync is going to be, and I'd rather not block landing nightly support for use<> on something I have no control over. If @rust-lang/rustfmt would rather I move this PR over to that repository, then I would at least like to know when the next rustfmt->rust subtree sync is going to be, since stabilizing precise_capturing without formatting will be disruptive.

This implementation is otherwise rather straightforward.

Tracking:

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 20, 2024

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

rustbot has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jun 20, 2024

Some changes occurred in src/tools/rustfmt

cc @rust-lang/rustfmt

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jun 20, 2024
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

r? @calebcartwright or @ytmimi

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

CI failure looks unrelated.

@calebcartwright
Copy link
Member

then I would at least like to know when the next rustfmt->rust subtree sync is going to be, since stabilizing precise_capturing without formatting will be disruptive.

Anticipating tomorrow (June 21st), depending on how the topic discussed in zulip shakes out timing wise

if this needs to land first that's fine, but may knock the sync back by a couple hours/days if this lands first (git subtree can be very fussy)

Copy link
Member

@calebcartwright calebcartwright left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm and npm ci issues seem highly unrelated indeed 😆

feel free to r=me if this needs to get in before the sync, though even if the implementation goes ahead in this repo it would be nice if we could have bors land the subtree sync PR first and then this after, as we can't rebase on syncs

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

compiler-errors commented Jun 21, 2024

I'll wait until after the next rustfmt->rust subtree sync, then land this PR on rust. I'm happy to wait a few days -- there's not that much urgency here.

Then this PR can get merged back into rustfmt's repo at your own pace with the next rust->rustfmt subtree sync. Don't want to cause any pains around this next rustfmt->rust sync.

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

OK this is ready and looks like the merge went through (#126842).

@bors r=calebcartwright

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 23, 2024

📌 Commit a426d6f has been approved by calebcartwright

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@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 Jun 23, 2024
workingjubilee added a commit to workingjubilee/rustc that referenced this pull request Jun 24, 2024
…ebcartwright

Implement `use<>` formatting in rustfmt

This PR implements formatting for precise-capturing `use<>` syntax as proposed in rust-lang#126753.

The syntax is implemented as-if the `use<>` bound were a trait bound but with the `use` keyword as its path segment identifier.

I opted to develop this in the rust-lang/rust tree since I'm not certain when the next rustfmt subtree sync is going to be, and I'd rather not block landing nightly support for `use<>` on something I have no control over. If `@rust-lang/rustfmt` would rather I move this PR over to that repository, then I would at least like to know when the next rustfmt->rust subtree sync is going to be, since stabilizing `precise_capturing` without formatting will be disruptive.

This implementation is otherwise rather straightforward.

Tracking:

- rust-lang#123432
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 24, 2024
…kingjubilee

Rollup of 9 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#126177 (Add hard error and migration lint for unsafe attrs)
 - rust-lang#126298 (Promote loongarch64-unknown-linux-musl to Tier 2 with host tools)
 - rust-lang#126455 (For [E0308]: mismatched types, when expr is in an arm's body, not add semicolon ';' at the end of it.)
 - rust-lang#126754 (Implement `use<>` formatting in rustfmt)
 - rust-lang#126807 (std::unix::fs: copy simplification for apple.)
 - rust-lang#126845 (Weekly `cargo update`)
 - rust-lang#126849 (Fix 32-bit Arm reg classes by hierarchically sorting them)
 - rust-lang#126854 (std::unix::os::home_dir: fallback's optimisation.)
 - rust-lang#126861 (Migrate `run-make/invalid-library` to `rmake.rs`)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 24, 2024
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 9 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#126177 (Add hard error and migration lint for unsafe attrs)
 - rust-lang#126298 (Promote loongarch64-unknown-linux-musl to Tier 2 with host tools)
 - rust-lang#126455 (For [E0308]: mismatched types, when expr is in an arm's body, not add semicolon ';' at the end of it.)
 - rust-lang#126754 (Implement `use<>` formatting in rustfmt)
 - rust-lang#126807 (std::unix::fs: copy simplification for apple.)
 - rust-lang#126845 (Weekly `cargo update`)
 - rust-lang#126849 (Fix 32-bit Arm reg classes by hierarchically sorting them)
 - rust-lang#126854 (std::unix::os::home_dir: fallback's optimisation.)
 - rust-lang#126888 (Remove stray println from rustfmt's `rewrite_static`)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit b24e3df into rust-lang:master Jun 24, 2024
6 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.81.0 milestone Jun 24, 2024
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jun 24, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#126754 - compiler-errors:use-rustfmt, r=calebcartwright

Implement `use<>` formatting in rustfmt

This PR implements formatting for precise-capturing `use<>` syntax as proposed in rust-lang#126753.

The syntax is implemented as-if the `use<>` bound were a trait bound but with the `use` keyword as its path segment identifier.

I opted to develop this in the rust-lang/rust tree since I'm not certain when the next rustfmt subtree sync is going to be, and I'd rather not block landing nightly support for `use<>` on something I have no control over. If ``@rust-lang/rustfmt`` would rather I move this PR over to that repository, then I would at least like to know when the next rustfmt->rust subtree sync is going to be, since stabilizing `precise_capturing` without formatting will be disruptive.

This implementation is otherwise rather straightforward.

Tracking:

- rust-lang#123432
jaisnan pushed a commit to jaisnan/rust-dev that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2024
Update Rust toolchain from nightly-2024-06-24 to nightly-2024-06-25
without any other source changes.
This is an automatically generated pull request. If any of the CI checks
fail, manual intervention is required. In such a case, review the
changes at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust from
rust-lang@bcf94de
up to
rust-lang@6b0f4b5.
The log for this commit range is:
rust-lang@6b0f4b5ec3 Auto merge of
rust-lang#126914 - compiler-errors:rollup-zx0hchm, r=compiler-errors
rust-lang@16bd6e25e1 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126911 - oli-obk:do_not_count_errors, r=compiler-errors
rust-lang@59c258f51f Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126909 - onur-ozkan:add-kobzol, r=matthiaskrgr
rust-lang@85eb835a14 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126904 - GrigorenkoPV:nonzero-fixme, r=joboet
rust-lang@a7721a0373 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126899 - GrigorenkoPV:suggest-const-block, r=davidtwco
rust-lang@9ce2a070b3 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126682 - Zalathar:coverage-attr, r=lcnr
rust-lang@49bdf460a2 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126673 - oli-obk:dont_rely_on_err_reporting, r=compiler-errors
rust-lang@46e43984d1 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126413 - matthiaskrgr:crshmsg, r=oli-obk
rust-lang@ed460d2eaa Rollup merge of
rust-lang#125575 - dingxiangfei2009:derive-smart-ptr, r=davidtwco
rust-lang@c77dc28f87 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#125082 - kpreid:const-uninit, r=dtolnay
rust-lang@faa28be2f1 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#124712 - Enselic:deprecate-inline-threshold, r=pnkfelix
rust-lang@00e5f5886a Rollup merge of
rust-lang#124460 - long-long-float:show-notice-about-enum-with-debug, r=pnkfelix
rust-lang@d8d5732456 Auto merge of
rust-lang#126784 - scottmcm:smaller-terminator, r=compiler-errors
rust-lang@13fca73f49 Replace
`MaybeUninit::uninit_array()` with array repeat expression.
rust-lang@5a3e2a4e92 Auto merge of
rust-lang#126523 - joboet:the_great_big_tls_refactor, r=Mark-Simulacrum
rust-lang@45261ff2ec add @Kobzol to
bootstrap team for triagebot
rust-lang@84474a25a4 Small fixme in core
now that NonZero is generic
rust-lang@50a02ed789 std: fix wasm builds
rust-lang@8fc6b3de19 Separate the mir
body lifetime from the other lifetimes
rust-lang@1c4d0ced58 Separate the
lifetimes of the `BorrowckInferCtxt` from the other borrowed items
rust-lang@d371d17496 Auto merge of
rust-lang#126900 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-24ah97b, r=matthiaskrgr
rust-lang@8ffb5f936a compiletest: make
the crash test error message abit more informative
rust-lang@a80ee9159b Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126882 - estebank:multiline-order, r=WaffleLapkin
rust-lang@8bfde609e2 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126414 - ChrisDenton:target-known, r=Nilstrieb
rust-lang@94b9ea417d Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126213 - zachs18:atomicbool-u8-i8-from-ptr-alignment, r=Nilstrieb
rust-lang@9d24ecc37b Rollup merge of
rust-lang#125241 - Veykril:tool-rust-analyzer, r=davidtwco
rust-lang@ba5ec1fc5c Suggest inline const
blocks for array initialization
rust-lang@06c072f158 Auto merge of
rust-lang#126788 - GuillaumeGomez:migrate-rustdoc-tests-syntax, r=fmease,oli-obk
rust-lang@1852141219 coverage: Bless
coverage attribute tests
rust-lang@b7c057c9b2 coverage: Always
error on `#[coverage(..)]` in unexpected places
rust-lang@a000fa8b54 coverage: Tighten
validation of `#[coverage(off)]` and `#[coverage(on)]`
rust-lang@b5dfeba0e1 coverage: Forbid
multiple `#[coverage(..)]` attributes
rust-lang@6909feab8e Allow numbers in
rustdoc tests commands
rust-lang@4e258bb4c3 Fix tidy issue for
rustdoc tests commands
rust-lang@51fedf65ff Remove commands
duplication between `compiletest` and `tests/rustdoc`
rust-lang@1b67035579 Update
`tests/rustdoc` to new test syntax
rust-lang@d3ec92e16e Move `tests/rustdoc`
testsuite to `//@` syntax
rust-lang@2c243d9570 Auto merge of
rust-lang#126891 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-p6dl1gk, r=matthiaskrgr
rust-lang@b94d2754b5 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126888 - compiler-errors:oops-debug-printing, r=dtolnay
rust-lang@9892b3e9fe Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126854 - devnexen:std_unix_os_fallback_upd, r=Mark-Simulacrum
rust-lang@3108dfaced Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126849 - workingjubilee:correctly-classify-arm-low-dregs, r=Amanieu
rust-lang@dcace866f0 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126845 - rust-lang:cargo_update, r=Mark-Simulacrum
rust-lang@21850f5bd8 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126807 - devnexen:copy_file_macos_simpl, r=Mark-Simulacrum
rust-lang@b24e3df0df Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126754 - compiler-errors:use-rustfmt, r=calebcartwright
rust-lang@ad0531ae0d Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126455 - surechen:fix_126222, r=estebank
rust-lang@7babf99ea9 Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126298 - heiher:loongarch64-musl-ci, r=Mark-Simulacrum
rust-lang@9a591ea1ce Rollup merge of
rust-lang#126177 - carbotaniuman:unsafe_attr_errors, r=jieyouxu
rust-lang@25446c25fc Remove stray println
from rustfmt
rust-lang@d49994b060 Auto merge of
rust-lang#126023 - amandasystems:you-dropped-this-again, r=nikomatsakis
rust-lang@a23917cfd0 Add hard error and
migration lint for unsafe attrs
rust-lang@284437d434 Special case when a
code line only has multiline span starts
rust-lang@f1be59fa72 SmartPointer
derive-macro
rust-lang@a426d6fdf0 Implement use<>
formatting in rustfmt
rust-lang@16fef40896 Promote
loongarch64-unknown-linux-musl to Tier 2 with host tools
rust-lang@03d73fa6ba ci: Add support for
dist-loongarch64-musl
rust-lang@fc50acae90 fix build
rust-lang@bd9ce3e074
std::unix::os::home_dir: fallback's optimisation.
rust-lang@0d8f734172 compiler: Fix arm32
asm issues by hierarchically sorting reg classes
rust-lang@e8b5ba1111 For [E0308]:
mismatched types, when expr is in an arm's body, not add semicolon ';'
at the end of it.
rust-lang@990535723d cargo update
rust-lang@b28efb11af Save 2 pointers in
`TerminatorKind` (96 → 80 bytes)
rust-lang@65530ba100 std::unix::fs: copy
simplification for apple.
rust-lang@339015920d Add `rust_analyzer`
as a predefined tool
rust-lang@3f2f8438b4 Ensure we don't
accidentally succeed when we want to report an error
rust-lang@32f9b8bf76 std: rename module
for clarity
rust-lang@35f050b8da std: update TLS
module documentation
rust-lang@b2f29edc81 std: use the `c_int`
from `core::ffi` instead of `libc`
rust-lang@d70f071392 std: simplify
`#[cfg]`s for TLS
rust-lang@d630f5da7a Show notice about
"never used" for enum
rust-lang@f3facf1175 std: refactor the
TLS implementation
rust-lang@f5f067bf9d Deprecate no-op
codegen option `-Cinline-threshold=...`
rust-lang@651ff643ae Fix typo in
`-Cno-stack-check` deprecation warning
rust-lang@3af624272a rustc_codegen_ssa:
Remove unused ModuleConfig::inline_threshold
rust-lang@34e6ea1446 Tier 2 std support
must always be known
rust-lang@2d4cb7aa5a Update docs for
AtomicU8/I8.
rust-lang@7885c7b7b2 Update safety docs
for AtomicBool::from_ptr.
rust-lang@7b5b7a7010 Remove confusing
`use_polonius` flag and do less cloning

Co-authored-by: tautschnig <1144736+tautschnig@users.noreply.github.com>
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 20, 2024
…=spastorino

Stabilize opaque type precise capturing (RFC 3617)

This PR partially stabilizes opaque type *precise capturing*, which was specified in [RFC 3617](rust-lang/rfcs#3617), and whose syntax was amended by FCP in [rust-lang#125836](rust-lang#125836).

This feature, as stabilized here, gives us a way to explicitly specify the generic lifetime parameters that an RPIT-like opaque type captures.  This solves the problem of overcapturing, for lifetime parameters in these opaque types, and will allow the Lifetime Capture Rules 2024 ([RFC 3498](rust-lang/rfcs#3498)) to be fully stabilized for RPIT in Rust 2024.

### What are we stabilizing?

This PR stabilizes the use of a `use<'a, T>` bound in return-position impl Trait opaque types.  Such a bound fully specifies the set of generic parameters captured by the RPIT opaque type, entirely overriding the implicit default behavior.  E.g.:

```rust
fn does_not_capture<'a, 'b>() -> impl Sized + use<'a> {}
//                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
//                This RPIT opaque type does not capture `'b`.
```

The way we would suggest thinking of `impl Trait` types *without* an explicit `use<..>` bound is that the `use<..>` bound has been *elided*, and that the bound is filled in automatically by the compiler according to the edition-specific capture rules.

All non-`'static` lifetime parameters, named (i.e. non-APIT) type parameters, and const parameters in scope are valid to name, including an elided lifetime if such a lifetime would also be valid in an outlives bound, e.g.:

```rust
fn elided(x: &u8) -> impl Sized + use<'_> { x }
```

Lifetimes must be listed before type and const parameters, but otherwise the ordering is not relevant to the `use<..>` bound.  Captured parameters may not be duplicated.  For now, only one `use<..>` bound may appear in a bounds list.  It may appear anywhere within the bounds list.

### How does this differ from the RFC?

This stabilization differs from the RFC in one respect: the RFC originally specified `use<'a, T>` as syntactically part of the RPIT type itself, e.g.:

```rust
fn capture<'a>() -> impl use<'a> Sized {}
```

However, settling on the final syntax was left as an open question.  T-lang later decided via FCP in [rust-lang#125836](rust-lang#125836) to treat `use<..>` as a syntactic bound instead, e.g.:

```rust
fn capture<'a>() -> impl Sized + use<'a> {}
```

### What aren't we stabilizing?

The key goal of this PR is to stabilize the parts of *precise capturing* that are needed to enable the migration to Rust 2024.

There are some capabilities of *precise capturing* that the RFC specifies but that we're not stabilizing here, as these require further work on the type system.  We hope to lift these limitations later.

The limitations that are part of this PR were specified in the [RFC's stabilization strategy](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3617-precise-capturing.html#stabilization-strategy).

#### Not capturing type or const parameters

The RFC addresses the overcapturing of type and const parameters; that is, it allows for them to not be captured in opaque types.  We're not stabilizing that in this PR.  Since all in scope generic type and const parameters are implicitly captured in all editions, this is not needed for the migration to Rust 2024.

For now, when using `use<..>`, all in scope type and const parameters must be nameable (i.e., APIT cannot be used) and included as arguments.  For example, this is an error because `T` is in scope and not included as an argument:

```rust
fn test<T>() -> impl Sized + use<> {}
//~^ ERROR `impl Trait` must mention all type parameters in scope in `use<...>`
```

This is due to certain current limitations in the type system related to how generic parameters are represented as captured (i.e. bivariance) and how inference operates.

We hope to relax this in the future, and this stabilization is forward compatible with doing so.

#### Precise capturing for return-position impl Trait **in trait** (RPITIT)

The RFC specifies precise capturing for RPITIT.  We're not stabilizing that in this PR.  Since RPITIT already adheres to the Lifetime Capture Rules 2024, this isn't needed for the migration to Rust 2024.

The effect of this is that the anonymous associated types created by RPITITs must continue to capture all of the lifetime parameters in scope, e.g.:

```rust
trait Foo<'a> {
    fn test() -> impl Sized + use<Self>;
    //~^ ERROR `use<...>` precise capturing syntax is currently not allowed in return-position `impl Trait` in traits
}
```

To allow this involves a meaningful amount of type system work related to adding variance to GATs or reworking how generics are represented in RPITITs.  We plan to do this work separately from the stabilization.  See:

- rust-lang#124029

Supporting precise capturing for RPITIT will also require us to implement a new algorithm for detecting refining capture behavior.  This may involve looking through type parameters to detect cases where the impl Trait type in an implementation captures fewer lifetimes than the corresponding RPITIT in the trait definition, e.g.:

```rust
trait Foo {
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<Self>;
}

impl<'a> Foo for &'a () {
    // This is "refining" due to not capturing `'a` which
    // is implied by the trait's `use<Self>`.
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<>;

    // This is not "refining".
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<'a>;
}
```

This stabilization is forward compatible with adding support for this later.

### The technical details

This bound is purely syntactical and does not lower to a [`Clause`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.79.0/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/type.ClauseKind.html) in the type system.  For the purposes of the type system (and for the types team's curiosity regarding this stabilization), we have no current need to represent this as a `ClauseKind`.

Since opaques already capture a variable set of lifetimes depending on edition and their syntactical position (e.g. RPIT vs RPITIT), a `use<..>` bound is just a way to explicitly rather than implicitly specify that set of lifetimes, and this only affects opaque type lowering from AST to HIR.

### FCP plan

While there's much discussion of the type system here, the feature in this PR is implemented internally as a transformation that happens before lowering to the type system layer.  We already support impl Trait types partially capturing the in scope lifetimes; we just currently only expose that implicitly.

So, in my (errs's) view as a types team member, there's nothing for types to weigh in on here with respect to the implementation being stabilized, and I'd suggest a lang-only proposed FCP (though we'll of course CC the team below).

### Authorship and acknowledgments

This stabilization report was coauthored by compiler-errors and TC.

TC would like to acknowledge the outstanding and speedy work that compiler-errors has done to make this feature happen.

compiler-errors thanks TC for authoring the RFC, for all of his involvement in this feature's development, and pushing the Rust 2024 edition forward.

### Open items

We're doing some things in parallel here.  In signaling the intention to stabilize, we want to uncover any latent issues so we can be sure they get addressed.  We want to give the maximum time for discussion here to happen by starting it while other remaining miscellaneous work proceeds.  That work includes:

- [x] Look into `syn` support.
  - dtolnay/syn#1677
  - dtolnay/syn#1707
- [x] Look into `rustfmt` support.
  - rust-lang#126754
- [x] Look into `rust-analyzer` support.
  - rust-lang/rust-analyzer#17598
  - rust-lang/rust-analyzer#17676
- [x] Look into `rustdoc` support.
  - rust-lang#127228
  - rust-lang#127632
  - rust-lang#127658
- [x] Suggest this feature to RfL (a known nightly user).
- [x] Add a chapter to the edition guide.
  - rust-lang/edition-guide#316
- [x] Update the Reference.
  - rust-lang/reference#1577

### (Selected) implementation history

* rust-lang/rfcs#3498
* rust-lang/rfcs#3617
* rust-lang#123468
* rust-lang#125836
* rust-lang#126049
* rust-lang#126753

Closes rust-lang#123432.

cc `@rust-lang/lang` `@rust-lang/types`

`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated +A-impl-trait +F-precise_capturing

Tracking:

- rust-lang#123432

----

For the compiler reviewer, I'll leave some inline comments about diagnostics fallout :^)

r? compiler
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 20, 2024
…=spastorino

Stabilize opaque type precise capturing (RFC 3617)

This PR partially stabilizes opaque type *precise capturing*, which was specified in [RFC 3617](rust-lang/rfcs#3617), and whose syntax was amended by FCP in [rust-lang#125836](rust-lang#125836).

This feature, as stabilized here, gives us a way to explicitly specify the generic lifetime parameters that an RPIT-like opaque type captures.  This solves the problem of overcapturing, for lifetime parameters in these opaque types, and will allow the Lifetime Capture Rules 2024 ([RFC 3498](rust-lang/rfcs#3498)) to be fully stabilized for RPIT in Rust 2024.

### What are we stabilizing?

This PR stabilizes the use of a `use<'a, T>` bound in return-position impl Trait opaque types.  Such a bound fully specifies the set of generic parameters captured by the RPIT opaque type, entirely overriding the implicit default behavior.  E.g.:

```rust
fn does_not_capture<'a, 'b>() -> impl Sized + use<'a> {}
//                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
//                This RPIT opaque type does not capture `'b`.
```

The way we would suggest thinking of `impl Trait` types *without* an explicit `use<..>` bound is that the `use<..>` bound has been *elided*, and that the bound is filled in automatically by the compiler according to the edition-specific capture rules.

All non-`'static` lifetime parameters, named (i.e. non-APIT) type parameters, and const parameters in scope are valid to name, including an elided lifetime if such a lifetime would also be valid in an outlives bound, e.g.:

```rust
fn elided(x: &u8) -> impl Sized + use<'_> { x }
```

Lifetimes must be listed before type and const parameters, but otherwise the ordering is not relevant to the `use<..>` bound.  Captured parameters may not be duplicated.  For now, only one `use<..>` bound may appear in a bounds list.  It may appear anywhere within the bounds list.

### How does this differ from the RFC?

This stabilization differs from the RFC in one respect: the RFC originally specified `use<'a, T>` as syntactically part of the RPIT type itself, e.g.:

```rust
fn capture<'a>() -> impl use<'a> Sized {}
```

However, settling on the final syntax was left as an open question.  T-lang later decided via FCP in [rust-lang#125836](rust-lang#125836) to treat `use<..>` as a syntactic bound instead, e.g.:

```rust
fn capture<'a>() -> impl Sized + use<'a> {}
```

### What aren't we stabilizing?

The key goal of this PR is to stabilize the parts of *precise capturing* that are needed to enable the migration to Rust 2024.

There are some capabilities of *precise capturing* that the RFC specifies but that we're not stabilizing here, as these require further work on the type system.  We hope to lift these limitations later.

The limitations that are part of this PR were specified in the [RFC's stabilization strategy](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3617-precise-capturing.html#stabilization-strategy).

#### Not capturing type or const parameters

The RFC addresses the overcapturing of type and const parameters; that is, it allows for them to not be captured in opaque types.  We're not stabilizing that in this PR.  Since all in scope generic type and const parameters are implicitly captured in all editions, this is not needed for the migration to Rust 2024.

For now, when using `use<..>`, all in scope type and const parameters must be nameable (i.e., APIT cannot be used) and included as arguments.  For example, this is an error because `T` is in scope and not included as an argument:

```rust
fn test<T>() -> impl Sized + use<> {}
//~^ ERROR `impl Trait` must mention all type parameters in scope in `use<...>`
```

This is due to certain current limitations in the type system related to how generic parameters are represented as captured (i.e. bivariance) and how inference operates.

We hope to relax this in the future, and this stabilization is forward compatible with doing so.

#### Precise capturing for return-position impl Trait **in trait** (RPITIT)

The RFC specifies precise capturing for RPITIT.  We're not stabilizing that in this PR.  Since RPITIT already adheres to the Lifetime Capture Rules 2024, this isn't needed for the migration to Rust 2024.

The effect of this is that the anonymous associated types created by RPITITs must continue to capture all of the lifetime parameters in scope, e.g.:

```rust
trait Foo<'a> {
    fn test() -> impl Sized + use<Self>;
    //~^ ERROR `use<...>` precise capturing syntax is currently not allowed in return-position `impl Trait` in traits
}
```

To allow this involves a meaningful amount of type system work related to adding variance to GATs or reworking how generics are represented in RPITITs.  We plan to do this work separately from the stabilization.  See:

- rust-lang#124029

Supporting precise capturing for RPITIT will also require us to implement a new algorithm for detecting refining capture behavior.  This may involve looking through type parameters to detect cases where the impl Trait type in an implementation captures fewer lifetimes than the corresponding RPITIT in the trait definition, e.g.:

```rust
trait Foo {
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<Self>;
}

impl<'a> Foo for &'a () {
    // This is "refining" due to not capturing `'a` which
    // is implied by the trait's `use<Self>`.
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<>;

    // This is not "refining".
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<'a>;
}
```

This stabilization is forward compatible with adding support for this later.

### The technical details

This bound is purely syntactical and does not lower to a [`Clause`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.79.0/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/type.ClauseKind.html) in the type system.  For the purposes of the type system (and for the types team's curiosity regarding this stabilization), we have no current need to represent this as a `ClauseKind`.

Since opaques already capture a variable set of lifetimes depending on edition and their syntactical position (e.g. RPIT vs RPITIT), a `use<..>` bound is just a way to explicitly rather than implicitly specify that set of lifetimes, and this only affects opaque type lowering from AST to HIR.

### FCP plan

While there's much discussion of the type system here, the feature in this PR is implemented internally as a transformation that happens before lowering to the type system layer.  We already support impl Trait types partially capturing the in scope lifetimes; we just currently only expose that implicitly.

So, in my (errs's) view as a types team member, there's nothing for types to weigh in on here with respect to the implementation being stabilized, and I'd suggest a lang-only proposed FCP (though we'll of course CC the team below).

### Authorship and acknowledgments

This stabilization report was coauthored by compiler-errors and TC.

TC would like to acknowledge the outstanding and speedy work that compiler-errors has done to make this feature happen.

compiler-errors thanks TC for authoring the RFC, for all of his involvement in this feature's development, and pushing the Rust 2024 edition forward.

### Open items

We're doing some things in parallel here.  In signaling the intention to stabilize, we want to uncover any latent issues so we can be sure they get addressed.  We want to give the maximum time for discussion here to happen by starting it while other remaining miscellaneous work proceeds.  That work includes:

- [x] Look into `syn` support.
  - dtolnay/syn#1677
  - dtolnay/syn#1707
- [x] Look into `rustfmt` support.
  - rust-lang#126754
- [x] Look into `rust-analyzer` support.
  - rust-lang/rust-analyzer#17598
  - rust-lang/rust-analyzer#17676
- [x] Look into `rustdoc` support.
  - rust-lang#127228
  - rust-lang#127632
  - rust-lang#127658
- [x] Suggest this feature to RfL (a known nightly user).
- [x] Add a chapter to the edition guide.
  - rust-lang/edition-guide#316
- [x] Update the Reference.
  - rust-lang/reference#1577

### (Selected) implementation history

* rust-lang/rfcs#3498
* rust-lang/rfcs#3617
* rust-lang#123468
* rust-lang#125836
* rust-lang#126049
* rust-lang#126753

Closes rust-lang#123432.

cc `@rust-lang/lang` `@rust-lang/types`

`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated +A-impl-trait +F-precise_capturing

Tracking:

- rust-lang#123432

----

For the compiler reviewer, I'll leave some inline comments about diagnostics fallout :^)

r? compiler
github-actions bot pushed a commit to rust-lang/miri that referenced this pull request Aug 26, 2024
Stabilize opaque type precise capturing (RFC 3617)

This PR partially stabilizes opaque type *precise capturing*, which was specified in [RFC 3617](rust-lang/rfcs#3617), and whose syntax was amended by FCP in [#125836](rust-lang/rust#125836).

This feature, as stabilized here, gives us a way to explicitly specify the generic lifetime parameters that an RPIT-like opaque type captures.  This solves the problem of overcapturing, for lifetime parameters in these opaque types, and will allow the Lifetime Capture Rules 2024 ([RFC 3498](rust-lang/rfcs#3498)) to be fully stabilized for RPIT in Rust 2024.

### What are we stabilizing?

This PR stabilizes the use of a `use<'a, T>` bound in return-position impl Trait opaque types.  Such a bound fully specifies the set of generic parameters captured by the RPIT opaque type, entirely overriding the implicit default behavior.  E.g.:

```rust
fn does_not_capture<'a, 'b>() -> impl Sized + use<'a> {}
//                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
//                This RPIT opaque type does not capture `'b`.
```

The way we would suggest thinking of `impl Trait` types *without* an explicit `use<..>` bound is that the `use<..>` bound has been *elided*, and that the bound is filled in automatically by the compiler according to the edition-specific capture rules.

All non-`'static` lifetime parameters, named (i.e. non-APIT) type parameters, and const parameters in scope are valid to name, including an elided lifetime if such a lifetime would also be valid in an outlives bound, e.g.:

```rust
fn elided(x: &u8) -> impl Sized + use<'_> { x }
```

Lifetimes must be listed before type and const parameters, but otherwise the ordering is not relevant to the `use<..>` bound.  Captured parameters may not be duplicated.  For now, only one `use<..>` bound may appear in a bounds list.  It may appear anywhere within the bounds list.

### How does this differ from the RFC?

This stabilization differs from the RFC in one respect: the RFC originally specified `use<'a, T>` as syntactically part of the RPIT type itself, e.g.:

```rust
fn capture<'a>() -> impl use<'a> Sized {}
```

However, settling on the final syntax was left as an open question.  T-lang later decided via FCP in [#125836](rust-lang/rust#125836) to treat `use<..>` as a syntactic bound instead, e.g.:

```rust
fn capture<'a>() -> impl Sized + use<'a> {}
```

### What aren't we stabilizing?

The key goal of this PR is to stabilize the parts of *precise capturing* that are needed to enable the migration to Rust 2024.

There are some capabilities of *precise capturing* that the RFC specifies but that we're not stabilizing here, as these require further work on the type system.  We hope to lift these limitations later.

The limitations that are part of this PR were specified in the [RFC's stabilization strategy](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/3617-precise-capturing.html#stabilization-strategy).

#### Not capturing type or const parameters

The RFC addresses the overcapturing of type and const parameters; that is, it allows for them to not be captured in opaque types.  We're not stabilizing that in this PR.  Since all in scope generic type and const parameters are implicitly captured in all editions, this is not needed for the migration to Rust 2024.

For now, when using `use<..>`, all in scope type and const parameters must be nameable (i.e., APIT cannot be used) and included as arguments.  For example, this is an error because `T` is in scope and not included as an argument:

```rust
fn test<T>() -> impl Sized + use<> {}
//~^ ERROR `impl Trait` must mention all type parameters in scope in `use<...>`
```

This is due to certain current limitations in the type system related to how generic parameters are represented as captured (i.e. bivariance) and how inference operates.

We hope to relax this in the future, and this stabilization is forward compatible with doing so.

#### Precise capturing for return-position impl Trait **in trait** (RPITIT)

The RFC specifies precise capturing for RPITIT.  We're not stabilizing that in this PR.  Since RPITIT already adheres to the Lifetime Capture Rules 2024, this isn't needed for the migration to Rust 2024.

The effect of this is that the anonymous associated types created by RPITITs must continue to capture all of the lifetime parameters in scope, e.g.:

```rust
trait Foo<'a> {
    fn test() -> impl Sized + use<Self>;
    //~^ ERROR `use<...>` precise capturing syntax is currently not allowed in return-position `impl Trait` in traits
}
```

To allow this involves a meaningful amount of type system work related to adding variance to GATs or reworking how generics are represented in RPITITs.  We plan to do this work separately from the stabilization.  See:

- rust-lang/rust#124029

Supporting precise capturing for RPITIT will also require us to implement a new algorithm for detecting refining capture behavior.  This may involve looking through type parameters to detect cases where the impl Trait type in an implementation captures fewer lifetimes than the corresponding RPITIT in the trait definition, e.g.:

```rust
trait Foo {
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<Self>;
}

impl<'a> Foo for &'a () {
    // This is "refining" due to not capturing `'a` which
    // is implied by the trait's `use<Self>`.
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<>;

    // This is not "refining".
    fn rpit() -> impl Sized + use<'a>;
}
```

This stabilization is forward compatible with adding support for this later.

### The technical details

This bound is purely syntactical and does not lower to a [`Clause`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.79.0/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/type.ClauseKind.html) in the type system.  For the purposes of the type system (and for the types team's curiosity regarding this stabilization), we have no current need to represent this as a `ClauseKind`.

Since opaques already capture a variable set of lifetimes depending on edition and their syntactical position (e.g. RPIT vs RPITIT), a `use<..>` bound is just a way to explicitly rather than implicitly specify that set of lifetimes, and this only affects opaque type lowering from AST to HIR.

### FCP plan

While there's much discussion of the type system here, the feature in this PR is implemented internally as a transformation that happens before lowering to the type system layer.  We already support impl Trait types partially capturing the in scope lifetimes; we just currently only expose that implicitly.

So, in my (errs's) view as a types team member, there's nothing for types to weigh in on here with respect to the implementation being stabilized, and I'd suggest a lang-only proposed FCP (though we'll of course CC the team below).

### Authorship and acknowledgments

This stabilization report was coauthored by compiler-errors and TC.

TC would like to acknowledge the outstanding and speedy work that compiler-errors has done to make this feature happen.

compiler-errors thanks TC for authoring the RFC, for all of his involvement in this feature's development, and pushing the Rust 2024 edition forward.

### Open items

We're doing some things in parallel here.  In signaling the intention to stabilize, we want to uncover any latent issues so we can be sure they get addressed.  We want to give the maximum time for discussion here to happen by starting it while other remaining miscellaneous work proceeds.  That work includes:

- [x] Look into `syn` support.
  - dtolnay/syn#1677
  - dtolnay/syn#1707
- [x] Look into `rustfmt` support.
  - rust-lang/rust#126754
- [x] Look into `rust-analyzer` support.
  - rust-lang/rust-analyzer#17598
  - rust-lang/rust-analyzer#17676
- [x] Look into `rustdoc` support.
  - rust-lang/rust#127228
  - rust-lang/rust#127632
  - rust-lang/rust#127658
- [x] Suggest this feature to RfL (a known nightly user).
- [x] Add a chapter to the edition guide.
  - rust-lang/edition-guide#316
- [x] Update the Reference.
  - rust-lang/reference#1577

### (Selected) implementation history

* rust-lang/rfcs#3498
* rust-lang/rfcs#3617
* rust-lang/rust#123468
* rust-lang/rust#125836
* rust-lang/rust#126049
* rust-lang/rust#126753

Closes #123432.

cc `@rust-lang/lang` `@rust-lang/types`

`@rustbot` labels +T-lang +I-lang-nominated +A-impl-trait +F-precise_capturing

Tracking:

- rust-lang/rust#123432

----

For the compiler reviewer, I'll leave some inline comments about diagnostics fallout :^)

r? compiler
compiler-errors pushed a commit to compiler-errors/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 16, 2024
…ebcartwright

Implement `use<>` formatting in rustfmt

This PR implements formatting for precise-capturing `use<>` syntax as proposed in rust-lang#126753.

The syntax is implemented as-if the `use<>` bound were a trait bound but with the `use` keyword as its path segment identifier.

I opted to develop this in the rust-lang/rust tree since I'm not certain when the next rustfmt subtree sync is going to be, and I'd rather not block landing nightly support for `use<>` on something I have no control over. If ``@rust-lang/rustfmt`` would rather I move this PR over to that repository, then I would at least like to know when the next rustfmt->rust subtree sync is going to be, since stabilizing `precise_capturing` without formatting will be disruptive.

This implementation is otherwise rather straightforward.

Tracking:

- rust-lang#123432
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.

6 participants