fmt

5 files changed, 8 insertions, 7 deletions

diff --git a/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/abstract_const.rs b/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/abstract_const.rs
index 7c1029e6604..e297a01e90e 100644
--- a/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/abstract_const.rs
+++ b/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/abstract_const.rs
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ TrivialTypeTraversalAndLiftImpls! {
 pub type BoundAbstractConst<'tcx> = Result<Option<EarlyBinder<ty::Const<'tcx>>>, ErrorGuaranteed>;
 
 impl<'tcx> TyCtxt<'tcx> {
-    /// Returns a const with substs applied by
+    /// Returns a const without substs applied
     fn bound_abstract_const(self, uv: ty::WithOptConstParam<DefId>) -> BoundAbstractConst<'tcx> {
         let ac = if let Some((did, param_did)) = uv.as_const_arg() {
             self.thir_abstract_const_of_const_arg((did, param_did))
diff --git a/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/relate.rs b/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/relate.rs
index 84eeb81f1db..decd99de3c4 100644
--- a/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/relate.rs
+++ b/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/relate.rs
@@ -647,7 +647,7 @@ pub fn super_relate_consts<'tcx, R: TypeRelation<'tcx>>(
         (ty::ConstKind::Placeholder(p1), ty::ConstKind::Placeholder(p2)) => p1 == p2,
         (ty::ConstKind::Value(a_val), ty::ConstKind::Value(b_val)) => a_val == b_val,
 
-        (ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated(_au), ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated(_bu))
+        (ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated(_), ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated(_))
             if tcx.features().generic_const_exprs =>
         {
             if let (Ok(Some(a)), Ok(Some(b))) = (
@@ -681,7 +681,7 @@ pub fn super_relate_consts<'tcx, R: TypeRelation<'tcx>>(
         (ty::ConstKind::Expr(ae), ty::ConstKind::Expr(be)) => {
             let r = relation;
 
-            // FIXME(julianknodt): is it possible to relate two consts which are not identical
+            // FIXME(generic_const_exprs): is it possible to relate two consts which are not identical
             // exprs? Should we care about that?
             let expr = match (ae, be) {
                 (Expr::Binop(a_op, al, ar), Expr::Binop(b_op, bl, br))
diff --git a/compiler/rustc_privacy/src/lib.rs b/compiler/rustc_privacy/src/lib.rs
index f8e99006923..eebff421b81 100644
--- a/compiler/rustc_privacy/src/lib.rs
+++ b/compiler/rustc_privacy/src/lib.rs
@@ -286,8 +286,9 @@ where
     fn visit_const(&mut self, c: Const<'tcx>) -> ControlFlow<Self::BreakTy> {
         self.visit_ty(c.ty())?;
         let tcx = self.def_id_visitor.tcx();
-        if let ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated(uv) = c.kind() &&
-           let Ok(Some(ct)) = tcx.expand_unevaluated_abstract_const(uv.def, uv.substs) {
+        if let ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated(uv) = c.kind()
+            && let Ok(Some(ct)) = tcx.expand_unevaluated_abstract_const(uv.def, uv.substs)
+        {
             ct.super_visit_with(self)?;
         }
         ControlFlow::CONTINUE
diff --git a/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/const_evaluatable.rs b/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/const_evaluatable.rs
index 5df1f85ec41..d72e5c7a11c 100644
--- a/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/const_evaluatable.rs
+++ b/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/const_evaluatable.rs
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ pub fn is_const_evaluatable<'tcx>(
             // compilation with a useful error.
             Err(_) if tcx.sess.is_nightly_build()
                 && let Ok(Some(ac)) = tcx.expand_abstract_consts(ct)
-                && let ty::ConstKind::Expr(_) = ac.kind() => 
+                && let ty::ConstKind::Expr(_) = ac.kind() =>
             {
                 tcx.sess
                     .struct_span_fatal(
diff --git a/src/test/ui/const-generics/issues/issue-83249.rs b/src/test/ui/const-generics/issues/issue-83249.rs
index a16b28253b5..65148c55ee5 100644
--- a/src/test/ui/const-generics/issues/issue-83249.rs
+++ b/src/test/ui/const-generics/issues/issue-83249.rs
@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ fn foo<T: Foo>(_: [u8; T::N]) -> T {
 
 pub fn bar() {
     let _: u8 = foo([0; 1]);
-    
+
     let _ = foo([0; 1]);
     //~^ ERROR type annotations needed
 }