rust/tests/ui/issues/issue-69455.stderr

error[E0284]: type annotations needed
  --> $DIR/issue-69455.rs:29:41
   |
LL |     println!("{}", 23u64.test(xs.iter().sum()));
   |                          ----           ^^^ cannot infer type of the type parameter `S` declared on the method `sum`
   |                          |
   |                          type must be known at this point
   |
   = note: cannot satisfy `<u64 as Test<_>>::Output == _`
help: consider specifying the generic argument
   |
LL |     println!("{}", 23u64.test(xs.iter().sum::<S>()));
   |                                            +++++

error[E0283]: type annotations needed
  --> $DIR/issue-69455.rs:29:41
   |
LL |     println!("{}", 23u64.test(xs.iter().sum()));
   |                          ----           ^^^ cannot infer type of the type parameter `S` declared on the method `sum`
   |                          |
   |                          required by a bound introduced by this call
   |
note: multiple `impl`s satisfying `u64: Test<_>` found
  --> $DIR/issue-69455.rs:11:1
   |
LL | impl Test<u32> for u64 {
   | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
...
LL | impl Test<u64> for u64 {
   | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
help: consider specifying the generic argument
   |
LL |     println!("{}", 23u64.test(xs.iter().sum::<S>()));
   |                                            +++++

error: aborting due to 2 previous errors

Some errors have detailed explanations: E0283, E0284.
For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0283`.
Deprioritize fulfillment errors that come from expansions. 2023-01-13 00:27:58 +00:00			`error[E0284]: type annotations needed`
			`--> $DIR/issue-69455.rs:29:41`
fix misleading type annotation diagonstics This solves the method call part of issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69455 I added a `target_span` field so as to pin down the exact location of the error. We need a dedicated field `found_exact_method_call` to prioritize situations like the test case `issue-69455.rs`. If we reuse `found_method_call`, `found_local_pattern` will show up first. We can not move `found_method_call` up, it is undesirable in various situations. 2020-02-25 10:15:23 +00:00			`\|`
			`LL \| println!("{}", 23u64.test(xs.iter().sum()));`
diagnostics: update test cases to refer to assoc fn with `self` as method 2023-02-21 21:11:08 +00:00			\| ---- ^^^ cannot infer type of the type parameter `S` declared on the method `sum`
Deprioritize fulfillment errors that come from expansions. 2023-01-13 00:27:58 +00:00			`\| \|`
			`\| type must be known at this point`
Emit simpler code from format_args 2021-11-28 18:46:06 +00:00			`\|`
Deprioritize fulfillment errors that come from expansions. 2023-01-13 00:27:58 +00:00			= note: cannot satisfy `<u64 as Test<_>>::Output == _`
add new `emit_inference_failure_err` 2022-02-14 12:25:26 +00:00			`help: consider specifying the generic argument`
			`\|`
Deprioritize fulfillment errors that come from expansions. 2023-01-13 00:27:58 +00:00			`LL \| println!("{}", 23u64.test(xs.iter().sum::<S>()));`
			`\| +++++`
fix misleading type annotation diagonstics This solves the method call part of issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69455 I added a `target_span` field so as to pin down the exact location of the error. We need a dedicated field `found_exact_method_call` to prioritize situations like the test case `issue-69455.rs`. If we reuse `found_method_call`, `found_local_pattern` will show up first. We can not move `found_method_call` up, it is undesirable in various situations. 2020-02-25 10:15:23 +00:00
Point at overlapping impls when type annotations are needed 2021-10-01 13:05:17 +00:00			`error[E0283]: type annotations needed`
add new `emit_inference_failure_err` 2022-02-14 12:25:26 +00:00			`--> $DIR/issue-69455.rs:29:41`
Point at overlapping impls when type annotations are needed 2021-10-01 13:05:17 +00:00			`\|`
			`LL \| println!("{}", 23u64.test(xs.iter().sum()));`
diagnostics: update test cases to refer to assoc fn with `self` as method 2023-02-21 21:11:08 +00:00			\| ---- ^^^ cannot infer type of the type parameter `S` declared on the method `sum`
Rework ambiguity errors 2022-08-17 00:21:40 +00:00			`\| \|`
			`\| required by a bound introduced by this call`
Point at overlapping impls when type annotations are needed 2021-10-01 13:05:17 +00:00			`\|`
			note: multiple `impl`s satisfying `u64: Test<_>` found
			`--> $DIR/issue-69455.rs:11:1`
			`\|`
			`LL \| impl Test<u32> for u64 {`
			`\| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^`
			`...`
			`LL \| impl Test<u64> for u64 {`
			`\| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^`
add new `emit_inference_failure_err` 2022-02-14 12:25:26 +00:00			`help: consider specifying the generic argument`
Point at overlapping impls when type annotations are needed 2021-10-01 13:05:17 +00:00			`\|`
			`LL \| println!("{}", 23u64.test(xs.iter().sum::<S>()));`
			`\| +++++`

			`error: aborting due to 2 previous errors`
fix misleading type annotation diagonstics This solves the method call part of issue https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69455 I added a `target_span` field so as to pin down the exact location of the error. We need a dedicated field `found_exact_method_call` to prioritize situations like the test case `issue-69455.rs`. If we reuse `found_method_call`, `found_local_pattern` will show up first. We can not move `found_method_call` up, it is undesirable in various situations. 2020-02-25 10:15:23 +00:00
Deprioritize fulfillment errors that come from expansions. 2023-01-13 00:27:58 +00:00			`Some errors have detailed explanations: E0283, E0284.`
			For more information about an error, try `rustc --explain E0283`.