Fix regression 61475 #61500
Fix regression 61475 #61500
Conversation
estebank
added
the
beta-nominated
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
estebank
added
the
T-compiler
|
r? @petrochenkov perhaps? |
|
If we also wanted a test here, this seemed small and enough to reproduce on beta/nightly (but accepted on stable): enum E {
A, B
}
fn main() {
match &&E::A {
&&E::A => {
}
&&E::B => {
}
};
} |
|
@bors r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 5716e26 has been approved by |
petrochenkov
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Fix regression 61475 Addresses rust-lang#61475.
Fix regression 61475 Addresses rust-lang#61475.
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - #61069 (Make MIR drop terminators borrow the dropped location) - #61453 (Remove unneeded feature attr from atomic integers doctests) - #61488 (Fix NLL typeck ICEs) - #61500 (Fix regression 61475) - #61523 (Hide gen_future API from documentation) Failed merges: r? @ghost
|
discussed at T-compiler meeting; approved for beta-backport |
pnkfelix
added
the
beta-accepted
pietroalbini
removed
the
beta-nominated
[beta] Rollup backports Rolled up: * [beta] Permit unwinding through FFI by default #61569 Cherry-picked: * upgrade rustdoc's `pulldown-cmark` to 0.5.2 #60802 * Fix overflowing literal lint in loops #61098 * Revert edition-guide toolstate override #61110 * Turn turbo 🐟 🍨 into an error #61189 * Bump hashbrown to 0.4.0 #61388 * Fix regression 61475 #61500 r? @ghost
[beta] Rollup backports Rolled up: * [beta] Permit unwinding through FFI by default #61569 Cherry-picked: * upgrade rustdoc's `pulldown-cmark` to 0.5.2 #60802 * Fix overflowing literal lint in loops #61098 * Revert edition-guide toolstate override #61110 * Turn turbo 🐟 🍨 into an error #61189 * Bump hashbrown to 0.4.0 #61388 * Fix regression 61475 #61500 r? @ghost
| // If the next token is a keyword, then the tokens above *are* unambiguously incorrect: | ||
| // `if x { a } else { b } && if y { c } else { d }` | ||
| if !self.look_ahead(1, |t| t.is_reserved_ident()) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was the intention here to catch if, match, loop, while and for? Because it also triggers for {} &&false (which would otherwise parse the same way as {} & &false), despite {} &&0 being unaffected.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, this seems coincidental to #74233, and not actually a bug in itself.
| @@ -2847,7 +2847,11 @@ impl<'a> Parser<'a> { | |||
| // want to keep their span info to improve diagnostics in these cases in a later stage. | |||
| (true, Some(AssocOp::Multiply)) | // `{ 42 } *foo = bar;` or `{ 42 } * 3` | |||
| (true, Some(AssocOp::Subtract)) | // `{ 42 } -5` | |||
| (true, Some(AssocOp::Add)) => { // `{ 42 } + 42 | |||
| (true, Some(AssocOp::LAnd)) | // `{ 42 } &&x` (#61475) | |||
| (true, Some(AssocOp::Add)) // `{ 42 } + 42 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Add case (although not introduced in this PR) is also a bit strange... surely Rust expressions can't start with +?
That is, Rust has no "unary plus" operator, like other languages do.
| (true, Some(AssocOp::Multiply)) | // `{ 42 } *foo = bar;` or `{ 42 } * 3` | ||
| (true, Some(AssocOp::Subtract)) | // `{ 42 } -5` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If these are included, why isn't { 42 } & 3? Surely the have the same property?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah this seems like a reporting-only heuristic and only the can_continue_expr_unambiguously check is relevant to what I was seeing.
|
Looking again at this, I don't think this PR was necessary, it seems to have worked around the bug without fully fixing it. |
Addresses #61475.