diff options
| author | Michael Goulet <michael@errs.io> | 2022-12-30 21:26:34 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | GitHub <noreply@github.com> | 2022-12-30 21:26:34 -0800 |
| commit | 5b74a33b8d03da897553b42270cdab541d28b33f (patch) | |
| tree | 416bf3006b05d1a7ba7d7067c9d4542a5ef1cd43 /compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src | |
| parent | fad73392dc8659f34385f418c8f936bafa562dfb (diff) | |
| parent | 4271ed48e90d40eb42030e153d3c7b403789c5be (diff) | |
| download | rust-5b74a33b8d03da897553b42270cdab541d28b33f.tar.gz rust-5b74a33b8d03da897553b42270cdab541d28b33f.zip | |
Rollup merge of #106248 - dtolnay:revertupcastlint, r=jackh726
Revert "Implement allow-by-default `multiple_supertrait_upcastable` lint" This is a clean revert of #105484. I confirmed that reverting that PR fixes the regression reported in #106247. ~~I can't say I understand what this code is doing, but maybe it can be re-landed with a different implementation.~~ **Edit:** https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/106247#issuecomment-1367174384 has an explanation of why #105484 ends up surfacing spurious `where_clause_object_safety` errors. The implementation of `where_clause_object_safety` assumes we only check whether a trait is object safe when somebody actually uses that trait with `dyn`. However the implementation of `multiple_supertrait_upcastable` added in the problematic PR involves checking *every* trait for whether it is object-safe. FYI `@nbdd0121` `@compiler-errors`
Diffstat (limited to 'compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions