Stabilize assert_matches

[Voultapher]

Closes #82775

This is a revive of #120234, with the suggested move from the public assert_matches module to macros. This necessitates the rename of the internal macros modules to core_macros and std_macros respectively.

[rustbot]

r? @scottmcm

rustbot has assigned @scottmcm.
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]

HIR ty lowering was modified

cc @fmease

Some changes occurred to the core trait solver

cc @rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor

The run-make-support library was changed

cc @jieyouxu

Some changes occurred to the CTFE machinery

cc @rust-lang/wg-const-eval

Some changes occurred in src/tools/rustfmt

cc @rust-lang/rustfmt

Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy

cc @rust-lang/clippy

Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations

cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt

Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri interpreter

cc @rust-lang/miri

[Voultapher]

To all the people that got cc'd feel free to check the changes, but they should only amount to import renames.

[Voultapher]

Changing the filename of the private macros modules has wide reaching effects inside the rustc source code. Mostly the fix is to rename mentions to the path outside of rust code as in the error tests, but there are some places like src/tools/cargo/tests/testsuite/fix.rs that reference the path and I don't know why they do that.

[rustbot]

The Miri subtree was changed

cc @rust-lang/miri

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

[scottmcm]

Hmm, I found the FCP to stabilize in #82775 (comment)

But I couldn't find any decision on the module. So nominating for libs-api to weigh in on that part.

[Voultapher]

The module name was suggested here #120234 (comment) and here #120234 (comment)

We discussed this in today's @rust-lang/libs-api meeting. The consensus we came up with was:

We want to stabilize this. We're not thrilled with the module name assert_matches (std::assert_matches::assert_matches!), and would prefer a more general name there. However, we don't want to delay stabilization while trying to bikeshed that name.

Ah -- then maybe core::assertions, though that's a bit more of a mouthful. A broader core::macros wouldn't be horrible either IMO, but I could understand hesitation about that.

Given how popular this feature is and the previously expressed desires of the libs-api team to avoid blocking on bikesheding, I'd appreciate it if we could avoid another round of bikesheding here. std::macros and core::macros are about as intuitive a place for a macro to be in. In the future we can pull assert_matches into the prelude for Rust edition 2027.

[Voultapher]

Plus this PR has to touch a lot of files by necessity, so it be great if we could move forward in a reasonable amount of time to limit the amount of merge conflict resolution I'll have to do.

[scottmcm]

Process-wise, a meeting consensus is generally not enough to make a one-way decision like picking a stable path, and it seems clear that this wasn't part of the previous FCP, so I'm not comfortable merging it without explicit libs-api assent.

If they disagree with my assessment that's fine, but it's their decision to make.

[Voultapher]

so I'm not comfortable merging it without explicit libs-api assent.

Neither am I. Let's please ask for their approval. What I'd like to avoid is a situation where we block this because the team is happy enough with the name but maybe there could be a better one and so the discussion starts.

[Amanieu]

@rfcbot merge libs-api

[rust-rfcbot]

Team member @Amanieu has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members:

• @Amanieu
• @BurntSushi
• @dtolnay
• @joshtriplett
• @the8472

No concerns currently listed.

Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!

See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.

[rust-rfcbot]

🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔

[rust-rfcbot]

The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete.

As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed.

[jhpratt]

r=me after rebasing

[rust-log-analyzer]

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

REPOSITORY                                   TAG       IMAGE ID       CREATED       SIZE
ghcr.io/dependabot/dependabot-updater-core   latest    afc745c7535d   2 weeks ago   783MB
=> Removing docker images...
Deleted Images:
untagged: ghcr.io/dependabot/dependabot-updater-core:latest
untagged: ghcr.io/dependabot/dependabot-updater-core@sha256:faae3d3a1dedd24cde388bb506bbacc0f7ed1eae99ebac129af66acd8540c84a
deleted: sha256:afc745c7535da1bb12f92c273b9a7e9c52c3f12c5873714b2542da259c6d9769
deleted: sha256:64e147d5e54d9be8b8aa322e511cda02296eda4b8b8d063c6a314833aca50e29
deleted: sha256:5cba409bb463f4e7fa1a19f695450170422582c1bc7c0e934d893b4e5f558bc6
deleted: sha256:cddc6ebd344b0111eaab170ead1dfda24acdfe865ed8a12599a34d338fa8e28b
deleted: sha256:2412c3f334d79134573cd45e657fb6cc0abd75bef3881458b0d498d936545c8d

[Amanieu]

@bors delegate+

[rust-bors]

✌️ @Voultapher, you can now approve this pull request!

If @Amanieu told you to "r=me" after making some further change, then please make that change and post @bors r=Amanieu.

[Amanieu]

r=me once CI passes