about summary refs log tree commit diff
path: root/src/test/rustdoc-ui/coverage/basic.rs
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorbors <bors@rust-lang.org>2019-05-25 01:20:07 +0000
committerbors <bors@rust-lang.org>2019-05-25 01:20:07 +0000
commit524580312039e4fa5ccf91e8f7093cd755bc1aad (patch)
treed9e75790ba24c417af1011a1920584cde727ec0a /src/test/rustdoc-ui/coverage/basic.rs
parentdec4c5201f88efbc3020b04ba96a5ee2c3b6cfcd (diff)
parent123a456a4f6b1ddc02cf9fe54b55d2af076da0f6 (diff)
downloadrust-524580312039e4fa5ccf91e8f7093cd755bc1aad.tar.gz
rust-524580312039e4fa5ccf91e8f7093cd755bc1aad.zip
Auto merge of #60441 - vext01:try-to-kill-projection-params, r=oli-obk
Make place projections concrete.

**I'm not sure if we want this. I'm raising the PR  for discussion**

Whilst doing some work on our Rust fork, I noticed the following:

Once upon a time (commit 9bd35c07c26) there were two kinds of
projection: one for places, and one for constants. It therefore made
sense to share the `Projection` struct for both. Although the different
use-cases used different concrete types, sharing was made possible by
type-parameterisation of `Projection`.

Since then, however, the usage of projections in constants has
disappeared, meaning that (forgetting lifetimes for a moment) the
parameterised type is only every instantiated under one guise. So it may
as well be a concrete type. Right?

What do people think? This is entirely untested, although it does check.

If we *don't* want this, then we should at least update the incorrect comment against `Projection`.

Thanks
Diffstat (limited to 'src/test/rustdoc-ui/coverage/basic.rs')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions