| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
see comment added to the field in `VerifyBoundCx`.
|
|
|
|
Reverse folder hierarchy
#91318 introduced a trait for infallible folders distinct from the fallible version. For some reason (completely unfathomable to me now that I look at it with fresh eyes), the infallible trait was a supertrait of the fallible one: that is, all fallible folders were required to also be infallible. Moreover the `Error` associated type was defined on the infallible trait! It's so absurd that it has me questioning whether I was entirely sane.
This trait reverses the hierarchy, so that the fallible trait is a supertrait of the infallible one: all infallible folders are required to also be fallible (which is a trivial blanket implementation). This of course makes much more sense! It also enables the `Error` associated type to sit on the fallible trait, where it sensibly belongs.
There is one downside however: folders expose a `tcx` accessor method. Since the blanket fallible implementation for infallible folders only has access to a generic `F: TypeFolder`, we need that trait to expose such an accessor to which we can delegate. Alternatively it's possible to extract that accessor into a separate `HasTcx` trait (or similar) that would then be a supertrait of both the fallible and infallible folder traits: this would ensure that there's only one unambiguous `tcx` method, at the cost of a little additional boilerplate. If desired, I can submit that as a separate PR.
r? ````@jackh726````
|
|
fix universes in the NLL type tests
In the NLL code, we were not accommodating universes in the
`type_test` logic.
Fixes #98095.
r? `@compiler-errors`
This breaks some tests, however, so the purpose of this branch is more explanatory and perhaps to do a crater run.
|
|
|
|
per aliemjay's suggestion
|
|
|
|
Hat-tip: aliemjay
|
|
Co-authored-by: Oli Scherer <github35764891676564198441@oli-obk.de>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Point at return expression for RPIT-related error
Certainly this needs some diagnostic refining, but I wanted to show that it was possible first and foremost. Not sure if this is the right approach. Open to feedback.
Fixes #80583
|
|
|
|
lub: don't bail out due to empty binders
allows for the following to compile. The equivalent code using `struct Wrapper<'upper>(fn(&'upper ());` already compiles on stable.
```rust
let _: fn(&'upper ()) = match v {
true => lt_in_fn::<'a>(),
false => lt_in_fn::<'b>(),
};
```
see https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=7034a677190110941223cafac6632f70 for a complete example
r? ```@rust-lang/types```
|
|
#91318 introduced a trait for infallible folders distinct from the fallible version. For some reason (completely unfathomable to me now that I look at it with fresh eyes), the infallible trait was a supertrait of the fallible one: that is, all fallible folders were required to also be infallible. Moreover the `Error` associated type was defined on the infallible trait! It's so absurd that it has me questioning whether I was entirely sane.
This trait reverses the hierarchy, so that the fallible trait is a supertrait of the infallible one: all infallible folders are required to also be fallible (which is a trivial blanket implementation). This of course makes much more sense! It also enables the `Error` associated type to sit on the fallible trait, where it sensibly belongs.
There is one downside however: folders expose a `tcx` accessor method. Since the blanket fallible implementation for infallible folders only has access to a generic `F: TypeFolder`, we need that trait to expose such an accessor to which we can delegate. Alternatively it's possible to extract that accessor into a separate `HasTcx` trait (or similar) that would then be a supertrait of both the fallible and infallible folder traits: this would ensure that there's only one unambiguous `tcx` method, at the cost of a little additional boilerplate. If desired, I can submit that as a separate PR.
r? @jackh726
|
|
|
|
The code now accepts `Binder<OutlivesPredicate>`
instead of just `OutlivesPredicate` and thus exercises
the new, generalized `IfEqBound` codepaths. Note though
that we never *produce* Binder<OutlivesPredicate>, so we
are only testing a subset of those codepaths that excludes
actual higher-ranked outlives bounds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
we don't really take other things
|
|
|
|
the excessive generality becomes annoying later because
it wouldn't implement type folding etc
|
|
Make `ExprKind::Closure` a struct variant.
Simple refactor since we both need it to introduce additional fields in `ExprKind::Closure`.
r? ``@Aaron1011``
|
|
|
|
Rename the `ConstS::val` field as `kind`.
And likewise for the `Const::val` method.
Because its type is called `ConstKind`. Also `val` is a confusing name
because `ConstKind` is an enum with seven variants, one of which is
called `Value`. Also, this gives consistency with `TyS` and `PredicateS`
which have `kind` fields.
The commit also renames a few `Const` variables from `val` to `c`, to
avoid confusion with the `ConstKind::Value` variant.
r? `@BoxyUwU`
|
|
Remove RegionckMode in favor of calling new skip_region_resolution
Simple cleanup. We can skip a bunch of stuff for places where NLL does the region checking, so skip earlier.
r? rust-lang/types
|
|
And likewise for the `Const::val` method.
Because its type is called `ConstKind`. Also `val` is a confusing name
because `ConstKind` is an enum with seven variants, one of which is
called `Value`. Also, this gives consistency with `TyS` and `PredicateS`
which have `kind` fields.
The commit also renames a few `Const` variables from `val` to `c`, to
avoid confusion with the `ConstKind::Value` variant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
`ValuePairs::PolyTraitRefs` should be called "trait"s in type error diagnostics
Pretty simple, we already do this for `ValuePairs::TraitRefs`...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mention `infer::Trace` methods on `infer::At` methods' docs
I missed that you could do `infcx.at(...).trace(...).eq(a, b)` when `a` and `b` dont implement `ToTrace` but does implement `Relate` these docs would have helped see that :sweat_smile:
|
|
some additional `need_type_info.rs` cleanup
also fixes #97698, fixes #97806
cc `@estebank`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fixes #97698
|
|
|
