From 1fd13fddba59ab686d5a01c6ad182a5bc109fe00 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: David Wood <david.wood2@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 05:34:08 +0000
Subject: tests: add #![rustc_no_implicit_bounds]

After reviewing all tests with `?Sized` and discussing with lcnr, these
tests seem like they could probably benefit from
`#![rustc_no_implicit_bounds]`.
---
 .../overflow/recursion-limit-normalizes-to-constraints.rs         | 8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

(limited to 'tests/ui/traits/next-solver/overflow/recursion-limit-normalizes-to-constraints.rs')

diff --git a/tests/ui/traits/next-solver/overflow/recursion-limit-normalizes-to-constraints.rs b/tests/ui/traits/next-solver/overflow/recursion-limit-normalizes-to-constraints.rs
index dee5500aadd..e5a57a44d49 100644
--- a/tests/ui/traits/next-solver/overflow/recursion-limit-normalizes-to-constraints.rs
+++ b/tests/ui/traits/next-solver/overflow/recursion-limit-normalizes-to-constraints.rs
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
 //@ compile-flags: -Znext-solver=coherence
 //@ check-pass
+#![feature(rustc_attrs)]
+#![rustc_no_implicit_bounds]
 
 // A regression test for trait-system-refactor-initiative#70.
 
@@ -7,8 +9,8 @@ trait Trait {
     type Assoc;
 }
 
-struct W<T: ?Sized>(*mut T);
-impl<T: ?Sized> Trait for W<W<T>>
+struct W<T>(*mut T);
+impl<T> Trait for W<W<T>>
 where
     W<T>: Trait,
 {
@@ -20,6 +22,6 @@ impl<T: Trait<Assoc = u32>> NoOverlap for T {}
 // `Projection(<W<_> as Trait>::Assoc, u32)` should result in error even
 // though applying the impl results in overflow. This is necessary to match
 // the behavior of the old solver.
-impl<T: ?Sized> NoOverlap for W<T> {}
+impl<T> NoOverlap for W<T> {}
 
 fn main() {}
-- 
cgit 1.4.1-3-g733a5