| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
add #![rustc_no_implicit_bounds]
Follow-up from rust-lang/rust#137944.
Adds a new `rustc_attrs` attribute that stops rustc from adding any default bounds. Useful for tests where default bounds just add noise and make debugging harder.
After reviewing all tests with `?Sized`, these tests seem like they could probably benefit from `#![rustc_no_implicit_bounds]`.
- Skipping most of `tests/ui/unsized` as these seem to want to test `?Sized`
- Skipping tests that used `Box<T>` because it's still bound by `T: MetaSized`
- Skipping parsing or other tests that cared about `?Sized` syntactically
- Skipping tests for `derive(CoercePointee)` because this appears to check that the pointee type is relaxed with `?Sized` explicitly
r? `@lcnr`
|
|
After reviewing all tests with `?Sized` and discussing with lcnr, these
tests seem like they could probably benefit from
`#![rustc_no_implicit_bounds]`.
|
|
|
|
These tests just need blessing, they don't have any interesting behaviour
changes.
Some of these tests have new errors because `LegacyReceiver` cannot be
proven to be implemented now that it is also testing for `MetaSized` -
but this is just a consequence of the other errors in the test.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
incorrectly prefer builtin `dyn` impls :3
This makes #57893 slightly more exploitable with the new solver. It's still strictly better than the old solver and the underlying unsoundness persists in the new one even without this preference.
Properly fixing #57893 is something we've been looking at more deeply recently and discussed at the [Types Meetup during the All-Hands](https://hackmd.io/rz-4ghMzTb2wXOkdLKHaHw#Dyn-traits). Whatever approach we'll end up deciding on will likely require a fairly long transition period and some significant further design work. This should not block `-Znext-solver`.
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/183
r? `@compiler-errors` cc `@rust-lang/types`
|
|
|
|
eagerly check nested obligations when coercing fndefs
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/212
r? `@compiler-errors`
|
|
Use `DeepRejectCtxt` in `assemble_inherent_candidates_from_param`
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/214
We were not properly considering unnormalized param-env candidates in `assemble_inherent_candidates_from_param`.
r? lcnr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do not discard constraints on overflow if there was candidate ambiguity
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/201.
There's a pretty chunky justification in the test.
r? lcnr
|
|
with ambiguity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
handle specialization in the new trait solver
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/187
also fixes the regression in `plonky2_field` from https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/188
cc https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/111994
r? ```@compiler-errors```
|
|
|
|
uwu :3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fix replacing supertrait aliases in `ReplaceProjectionWith`
The new solver has a procedure called `predicates_for_object_candidate`, which elaborates the super-bounds and item-bounds that are required to hold for a dyn trait to implement something via a built-in object impl.
In that procedure, there is a folder called `ReplaceProjectionWith` which is responsible for replacing projections that reference `Self`, so that we don't encounter cycles when we then go on to normalize those projections in the process of proving these super-bounds.
That folder had a few problems: Firstly, it wasn't actually checking that this was a super bound originating from `Self`. Secondly, it only accounted for a *single* projection type def id, but trait objects can have multiple (i.e. `trait Foo<A, B>: Bar<A, Assoc = A> + Bar<B, Assoc = B>`).
To fix the first, it's simple enough to just add an equality check for the self ty. To fix the second, I implemented a matching step that's very similar to the `projection_may_match` check we have for upcasting, since on top of having multiple choices, we need to deal with both non-structural matches and ambiguity.
This probably lacks a bit of documentation, but I think it works pretty well.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/171
r? lcnr
|
|
|
|
|
|
drop global where-bounds before merging candidates
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/172
r? ```@compiler-errors```
|
|
|
|
`hir::AssocItem` currently has a boolean `fn_has_self_parameter` field,
which is misplaced, because it's only relevant for associated fns, not
for associated consts or types. This commit moves it (and renames it) to
the `AssocKind::Fn` variant, where it belongs.
This requires introducing a new C-style enum, `AssocTag`, which is like
`AssocKind` but without the fields. This is because `AssocKind` values
are passed to various functions like `find_by_ident_and_kind` to
indicate what kind of associated item should be searched for, and having
to specify `has_self` isn't relevant there.
New methods:
- Predicates `AssocItem::is_fn` and `AssocItem::is_method`.
- `AssocItem::as_tag` which converts `AssocItem::kind` to `AssocTag`.
Removed `find_by_name_and_kinds`, which is unused.
`AssocItem::descr` can now distinguish between methods and associated
functions, which slightly improves some error messages.
|
|
|
|
Fix breakage when running compiletest with `--test-args=--edition=2015`
Compiletest has an `--edition` flag to change the default edition tests are run with. Unfortunately no test suite successfully executes when that flag is passed. If the edition is set to something greater than 2015 the breakage is expected, since the test suite currently supports only edition 2015 (Ferrous Systems will open an MCP about fixing that soonish). Surprisingly, the test suite is also broken if `--edition=2015` is passed to compiletest. This PR focuses on fixing the latter.
This PR fixes the two categories of failures happening when `--edition=2015` is passed:
* Some edition-specific tests set their edition through `//@ compile-flags` instead of `//@ edition`. Compiletest doesn't parse the compile flags, so it would see no `//@ edition` and add another `--edition` flag, leading to a rustc error.
* Compiletest would add the edition after `//@ compile-flags`, while some tests depend on flags passed to `//@ compile-flags` being the last flags in the rustc invocation.
Note that for the first category, I opted to manually go and replace all `//@ compile-flags` setting an edition with an explicit `//@ edition`. We could've changed compiletest to instead check whether an edition was set in `//@ compile-flags`, but I thought it was better to enforce a consistent way to set the edition in tests.
I also added the edition to the stamp, so that changing `--edition` results in tests being re-executed.
r? `@jieyouxu`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For macros that are implemented on the compiler, we do *not* mention the `-Zmacro-backtrace` flag. This includes `derive`s and standard macros.
|
|
change definitely unproductive cycles to error
builds on top of #136824 by adding a third variant to `PathKind` for paths which may change to be coinductive in the future but must not be so right now. Most notably, impl where-clauses of not yet coinductive traits.
With this, we can change cycles which are definitely unproductive to a proper error. This fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/114. This does not affect stable as we keep these cycles as ambiguous during coherence.
r? ````````@compiler-errors```````` ````````@nikomatsakis````````
|
|
|
|
Remove unsizing coercions for tuples
See https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/42877#issuecomment-2686010847 and below comments for justification.
Tracking issue: #42877
Fixes: #135217
|
|
|
