compiletest: Support matching on diagnostics without a span

[petrochenkov]

Using //~? ERROR my message on any line of the test.

The new checks are exhaustive, like all other //~ checks, and unlike the error-pattern directive that is sometimes used now to check for span-less diagnostics.

This will allow to eliminate most on error-pattern directives in compile-fail tests (except those that are intentionally imprecise due to platform-specific diagnostics).
I didn't migrate any of error-patterns in this PR though, except those where the migration was necessary for the tests to pass.

[rustbot]

r? @wesleywiser

rustbot has assigned @wesleywiser.
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]

Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest

cc @jieyouxu

Some changes occurred in tests/ui/sanitizer

cc @rust-lang/project-exploit-mitigations, @rcvalle

Some changes occurred in tests/ui/stack-protector

cc @rust-lang/project-exploit-mitigations, @rcvalle

[jieyouxu]

r? jieyouxu

[jieyouxu]

Nice! The impl looks good to me, though some tests may need further adjusting (with some back and forth) due to platform specificness and other ignore conditions.

[jieyouxu]

Please ping me when you rebase/rebless so I can try to review ASAP, otherwise this will likely conflict very quickly.
@bors p=10 (very conflict-prone)

[jieyouxu]

Also, now that rustc-dev-guide is also a subtree, can you please adjust the UI annotations page in rustc-dev-guide at https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/tests/ui.html#error-annotations in this same PR? So that people will know about what //~? actually means. It would nice if we can discuss also in the docs when to use //@ error-pattern vs //~?, i.e. sth like "prefer to use //~? in UI tests unless the diagnostics is intentionally platform-specific or the test intention needs the vagueness of //@ error-pattern intentionally".

[rustbot]

The rustc-dev-guide subtree was changed. If this PR only touches the dev guide consider submitting a PR directly to rust-lang/rustc-dev-guide otherwise thank you for updating the dev guide with your changes.

cc @BoxyUwU, @jieyouxu, @Kobzol

[jieyouxu]

Thanks, both the impl and the test diffs look good to me!

[jieyouxu]

r=me if the PR CI comes back green.
@bors rollup=never (merge-conflict prone and a lot of tests)

[petrochenkov]

@bors r=jieyouxu

[bors]

📌 Commit 2b32c57 has been approved by jieyouxu

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 2b32c57 with merge 688a632...

[petrochenkov]

@bors r=jieyouxu

[bors]

📌 Commit 8d5109a has been approved by jieyouxu

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 8d5109a with merge 40507bd...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jieyouxu
Pushing 40507bd to master...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 48994b1 (parent) -> 40507bd (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (40507bd): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.1%, secondary 0.0%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.0%	[2.0%, 2.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.0%	[-2.0%, -2.0%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 777.999s -> 778.257s (0.03%)
Artifact size: 365.81 MiB -> 365.84 MiB (0.01%)