Add `-Ztrait-solver=next-coherence`
Flag that conditionally uses the trait solver *only* during coherence, for more testing and/or eventual partial-migration onto the trait solver (in the medium- to long-term).
* This still uses the selection context in some of the coherence methods I think, so it's not "complete". Putting this up for review and/or for further work in-tree.
* I probably need to spend a bit more time making sure that we don't sneakily create any other infcx's during coherence that also need the new solver enabled.
r? `@lcnr`
Emit an error when return-type-notation is used with type/const params
These are not intended to be supported initially, even though the compiler supports them internally...
- Switch TypeId to 128 bits
- Hack around the fact that tracing-subscriber dislikes how TypeId is hashed
- Remove lowering of type_id128 from rustc_codegen_llvm
- Remove unnecessary `type_id128` intrinsic (just change return type of `type_id`)
- Only hash the lower 64 bits of the TypeId
- Reword comment
Normalize anon consts in new solver
We don't do any of that `expand_abstract_consts` stuff so this isn't sufficient to make GCE work, but it does allow, e.g. `[(); 1]: Default`, to solve.
r? `@BoxyUwU`
Preserve substs in opaques recorded in typeck results
This means that we now prepopulate MIR with opaques with the right substs.
The first commit is a hack that I think we discussed, having to do with `DefiningAnchor::Bubble` basically being equivalent to `DefiningAnchor::Error` in the new solver, so having to use `DefiningAnchor::Bind` instead, lol.
r? `@lcnr`
`EarlyBinder::new` -> `EarlyBinder::bind`
for consistency with `Binder::bind`. it may make sense to also add `EarlyBinder::dummy` in places where we know that no parameters exist, but I left that out of this PR.
r? `@jackh726` `@kylematsuda`
Each of `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage::{Str,Eager}` has a comment:
```
// FIXME(davidtwco): can a `Cow<'static, str>` be used here?
```
This commit answers that question in the affirmative. It's not the most
compelling change ever, but it might be worth merging.
This requires changing the `impl<'a> From<&'a str>` impls to `impl
From<&'static str>`, which involves a bunch of knock-on changes that
require/result in call sites being a little more precise about exactly
what kind of string they use to create errors, and not just `&str`. This
will result in fewer unnecessary allocations, though this will not have
any notable perf effects given that these are error paths.
Note that I was lazy within Clippy, using `to_string` in a few places to
preserve the existing string imprecision. I could have used `impl
Into<{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage>` in various places as is done in the
compiler, but that would have required changes to *many* call sites
(mostly changing `&format("...")` to `format!("...")`) which didn't seem
worthwhile.
Rollup of 5 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #111741 (Use `ObligationCtxt` in custom type ops)
- #111840 (Expose more information in `get_body_with_borrowck_facts`)
- #111876 (Roll compiler_builtins to 0.1.92)
- #111912 (Use `Option::is_some_and` and `Result::is_ok_and` in the compiler )
- #111915 (libtest: Improve error when missing `-Zunstable-options`)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Check opaques for mismatch during writeback
Revive #111705.
I realized that we don't need to put any substs in the writeback results since all of the hidden types have already been remapped. See the comment in `compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/typeck_results.rs`, which should make that clear for other explorers of the codebase.
Additionally, we need to do some diagnostic stashing because the diagnostics we produce during HIR typeck is very poor and we should prefer the diagnostic that comes from MIR, if we have one.
r? `@oli-obk`
Handle error body in generator layout
Fixes#111468
I feel like making this query return `Option<GeneratorLayout>` might be better but had some issues with that approach
Error message all end up passing into a function as an `impl
Into<{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage>`. If an error message is creatd as
`&format("...")` that means we allocate a string (in the `format!`
call), then take a reference, and then clone (allocating again) the
reference to produce the `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage`, which is silly.
This commit removes the leading `&` from a lot of these cases. This
means the original `String` is moved into the
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage`, avoiding the double allocations. This
requires changing some function argument types from `&str` to `String`
(when all arguments are `String`) or `impl
Into<{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage>` (when some arguments are `String` and
some are `&str`).
Move expansion of query macros in rustc_middle to rustc_middle::query
This moves the expansion of `define_callbacks!` and `define_feedable!` from `rustc_middle::ty::query` to `rustc_middle::query`.
This means that types used in queries are both imported and used in `rustc_middle::query` instead of being split between these modules. It also decouples `rustc_middle::ty::query` further from `rustc_middle` which is helpful since we want to move `rustc_middle::ty::query` to the query system crates.
Rename const error methods for consistency
renames `ty::Const`'s methods for creating a `ConstKind::Error` to be in the same naming style as `ty::Ty`'s equivalent methods.
r? `@BoxyUwU`
use implied bounds when checking opaque types
During opaque type inference, we check for the well-formedness of the hidden type in the opaque type's own environment, not the one of the defining site, which are different in the case of TAIT.
However in the case of associated-type-impl-trait, we don't use implied bounds from the impl header. This caused us to reject the following:
```rust
trait Service<Req> {
type Output;
fn call(req: Req) -> Self::Output;
}
impl<'a, Req> Service<&'a Req> for u8 {
type Output= impl Sized; // we can't prove WF of hidden type `WF(&'a Req)` although it's implied by the impl
//~^ ERROR type parameter Req doesn't live long enough
fn call(req: &'a Req) -> Self::Output {
req
}
}
```
although adding an explicit bound would make it pass:
```diff
- impl<'a, Req> Service<&'a Req> for u8 {
+ impl<'a, Req> Service<&'a Req> for u8 where Req: 'a, {
```
I believe it should pass as we already allow the concrete type to be used:
```diff
impl<'a, Req> Service<&'a Req> for u8 {
- type Output= impl Sized;
+ type Output= &'a Req;
```
Fixes#95922
Builds on #105982
cc ``@lcnr`` (because implied bounds)
r? ``@oli-obk``
Various changes to name resolution of anon consts
Sorry this PR is kind of all over the place ^^'
Fixes#111012
- Rewrites anon const nameres to all go through `fn resolve_anon_const` explicitly instead of `visit_anon_const` to ensure that we do not accidentally resolve anon consts as if they are allowed to use generics when they aren't. Also means that we dont have bits of code for resolving anon consts that will get out of sync (i.e. legacy const generics and resolving path consts that were parsed as type arguments)
- Renames two of the `LifetimeRibKind`, `AnonConst -> ConcreteAnonConst` and `ConstGeneric -> ConstParamTy`
- Noticed while doing this that under `generic_const_exprs` all lifetimes currently get resolved to errors without any error being emitted which was causing a bunch of tests to pass without their bugs having been fixed, incidentally fixed that in this PR and marked those tests as `// known-bug:`. I'm fine to break those since `generic_const_exprs` is a very unstable incomplete feature and this PR _does_ make generic_const_exprs "less broken" as a whole, also I can't be assed to figure out what the underlying causes of all of them are. This PR reopens#77357#83993
- Changed `generics_of` to stop providing generics and predicates to enum variant discriminant anon consts since those are not allowed to use generic parameters
- Updated the error for non 'static lifetime in const arguments and the error for non 'static lifetime in const param tys to use `derive(Diagnostic)`
I have a vague idea why const-arg-in-const-arg.rs, in-closure.rs and simple.rs have started failing which is unfortunate since these were deliberately made to work, I think lifetime resolution being broken just means this regressed at some point and nobody noticed because the tests were not testing anything :( I'm fine breaking these too for the same reason as the tests for #77357#83993. I couldn't get `// known-bug` to work for these ICEs and just kept getting different stderr between CI and local `--bless` so I just removed them and will create an issue to track re-adding (and fixing) the bugs if this PR lands.
r? `@cjgillot` cc `@compiler-errors`
Min specialization improvements
- Don't allow specialization impls with no items, such implementations are probably not correct and only occur as mistakes in the compiler and standard library
- Fix a missing normalization call
- Adds spans for lifetime errors from overly general specializations
Closes#79457Closes#109815
Introduce `AliasKind::Inherent` for inherent associated types
Allows us to check (possibly generic) inherent associated types for well-formedness.
Type inference now also works properly.
Follow-up to #105961. Supersedes #108430.
Fixes#106722.
Fixes#108957.
Fixes#109768.
Fixes#109789.
Fixes#109790.
~Not to be merged before #108860 (`AliasKind::Weak`).~
CC `@jackh726`
r? `@compiler-errors`
`@rustbot` label T-types F-inherent_associated_types
Don't compute trait super bounds unless they're positive
Fixes#111207
The comment is modified to explain the rationale for why we even have this recursive call to supertraits in the first place, which doesn't apply to negative bounds since they don't elaborate at all.
enable `rust_2018_idioms` lint group for doctests
With this change, `rust_2018_idioms` lint group will be enabled for compiler/libstd doctests.
Resolves#106086Resolves#99144
Signed-off-by: ozkanonur <work@onurozkan.dev>
Support return-type bounds on associated methods from supertraits
Support `T: Trait<method(): Bound>` when `method` comes from a supertrait, aligning it with the behavior of associated type bounds (both equality and trait bounds).
The only wrinkle is that I have to extend `super_predicates_that_define_assoc_type` to look for *all* items, not just `AssocKind::Ty`. This will also be needed to support `feature(associated_const_equality)` as well, which is subtly broken when it comes to supertraits, though this PR does not fix those yet. There's a slight chance there's a perf regression here, in which case I guess I could split it out into a separate query.
Use fulfillment to check `Drop` impl compatibility
Use an `ObligationCtxt` to ensure that a `Drop` impl does not have stricter requirements than the ADT that it's implemented for, rather than using a `SimpleEqRelation` to (more or less) syntactically equate predicates on an ADT with predicates on an impl.
r? types
### Some background
The old code reads:
```rust
// An earlier version of this code attempted to do this checking
// via the traits::fulfill machinery. However, it ran into trouble
// since the fulfill machinery merely turns outlives-predicates
// 'a:'b and T:'b into region inference constraints. It is simpler
// just to look for all the predicates directly.
```
I'm not sure what this means, but perhaps in the 8 years since that this comment was written (cc #23638) it's gotten easier to process region constraints after doing fulfillment? I don't know how this logic differs from anything we do in the `compare_impl_item` module. Ironically, later on it says:
```rust
// However, it may be more efficient in the future to batch
// the analysis together via the fulfill (see comment above regarding
// the usage of the fulfill machinery), rather than the
// repeated `.iter().any(..)` calls.
```
Also:
* Removes `SimpleEqRelation` which was far too syntactical in its relation.
* Fixes#110557
Such implementations are usually mistakes and are not used in the
compiler or standard library (after this commit) so forbid them with
`min_specialization`.
Explicitly reject negative and reservation drop impls
Fixes#110858
It doesn't really make sense for a type to have a `!Drop` impl. Or at least, I don't want us to implicitly assign a meaning to it by the way the compiler *currently* handles it (incompletely), and rather I would like to see a PR (or an RFC...) assign a meaning to `!Drop` if we actually wanted one for it.
Implement negative bounds for internal testing purposes
Implements partial support the `!` negative polarity on trait bounds. This is incomplete, but should allow us to at least be able to play with the feature.
Not even gonna consider them as a public-facing feature, but I'm implementing them because would've been nice to have in UI tests, for example in #110671.
Currently a `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage` can be created from any type that
impls `Into<String>`. That includes `&str`, `String`, and `Cow<'static,
str>`, which are reasonable. It also includes `&String`, which is pretty
weird, and results in many places making unnecessary allocations for
patterns like this:
```
self.fatal(&format!(...))
```
This creates a string with `format!`, takes a reference, passes the
reference to `fatal`, which does an `into()`, which clones the
reference, doing a second allocation. Two allocations for a single
string, bleh.
This commit changes the `From` impls so that you can only create a
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage` from `&str`, `String`, or `Cow<'static,
str>`. This requires changing all the places that currently create one
from a `&String`. Most of these are of the `&format!(...)` form
described above; each one removes an unnecessary static `&`, plus an
allocation when executed. There are also a few places where the existing
use of `&String` was more reasonable; these now just use `clone()` at
the call site.
As well as making the code nicer and more efficient, this is a step
towards possibly using `Cow<'static, str>` in
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage::{Str,Eager}`. That would require changing
the `From<&'a str>` impls to `From<&'static str>`, which is doable, but
I'm not yet sure if it's worthwhile.
Fix elaboration with associated type bounds
When computing a trait's supertrait predicates, do not add any associated type *trait* bounds to that list of supertrait predicates. This is because supertrait predicates are expected to have the same `Self` type as the trait.
For example, given:
```rust
trait Foo: Bar<Assoc: Send>
```
Before, we would compute that the supertrait predicates of `T: Foo` are `T: Bar` and `<T as Bar>::Assoc: Send`. However, the last bound is a trait predicate for a totally different type than `T`, and existing code that uses supertrait bounds such as vtable construction, closure fn signature deduction, etc. all rely on the invariant that we have a list of predicates for self type `T`.
Fixes#76593
The reason for all the extra diagnostic noise is that we're recomputing predicates with a different filter now. These diagnostics should be deduplicated for any end-user though.
---
This does bring up an interesting question -- is the predicate `<T as Bar>::Assoc: Send` an implied bound of `T: Foo`? Because currently the only bounds implied by a (non-alias) trait are its supertraits. I guess I could fix this too, but it would require even more changes, and I'm inclined to punt this question along.
