diff options
| author | Matthias Krüger <matthias.krueger@famsik.de> | 2021-11-20 22:33:51 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | GitHub <noreply@github.com> | 2021-11-20 22:33:51 +0100 |
| commit | ec2f087c479bcb351156953ec9097ad3a779923f (patch) | |
| tree | e8e9f3e96a9787c8c3a80ce7380e1fd619ce21a6 /compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/coverage/mod.rs | |
| parent | f37a6caffe0ec03b0b32da9d7045f22d35deb526 (diff) | |
| parent | 1f625b739a1178e00ac36819738289b5dbc081ea (diff) | |
| download | rust-ec2f087c479bcb351156953ec9097ad3a779923f.tar.gz rust-ec2f087c479bcb351156953ec9097ad3a779923f.zip | |
Rollup merge of #91022 - compiler-errors:modulo_infer, r=estebank
Suggest `await` in more situations where infer types are involved Currently we use `TyS::same_type` in diagnostics that suggest adding `.await` to opaque future types. This change makes the suggestion slightly more general, when we're comparing types like `Result<T, E>` and `Result<_, _>` which happens sometimes in places like `match` patterns or `let` statements with partially-elaborated types. ---- Question: 1. Is this change worthwhile? Totally fine if it doesn't make sense adding. 2. Should `same_type_modulo_infer` live in `rustc_infer::infer::error_reporting` or alongside the other method in `rustc_middle::ty::util`? 3. Should we generalize this change? I wanted to change all usages, but I don't want erroneous suggestions when adding `.field_name`...
Diffstat (limited to 'compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/coverage/mod.rs')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions