detect additional uses of opaques after writeback
Based on #140607. It's a lot harder to encounter in practice than I though 😅😁 I've still added it with the expectation that somebody will encounter it at some point.
Also modifies the `EvalCtxt` to use the same impl to detect newly added opaque types.
r? ``@compiler-errors``
only return nested goals for `Certainty::Yes`
Ambiguous `NormalizesTo` goals can otherwise repeatedly add the same nested goals to the parent.
r? ```@compiler-errors```
Do not compute type_of for impl item if impl where clauses are unsatisfied
Consider the following code:
```rust
trait Foo {
fn call(self) -> impl Send;
}
trait Nested {}
impl<T> Foo for T
where
T: Nested,
{
fn call(self) -> impl Sized {
NotSatisfied.call()
}
}
struct NotSatisfied;
impl Foo for NotSatisfied {
fn call(self) -> impl Sized {
todo!()
}
}
```
In `impl Foo for NotSatisfied`, we need to prove that the RPITIT is well formed. This requires proving the item bound `<NotSatisfied as Foo>::RPITIT: Send`. Normalizing `<NotSatisfied as Foo>::RPITIT: Send` assembles two impl candidates, via the `NotSatisfied` impl and the blanket `T` impl. We end up computing the `type_of` for the blanket impl even if `NotSatisfied: Nested` where clause does not hold.
This type_of query ends up needing to prove that its own `impl Sized` RPIT satisfies `Send`, which ends up needing to compute the hidden type of the RPIT, which is equal to the return type of `NotSatisfied.call()`. That ends up in a query cycle, since we subsequently try normalizing that return type via the blanket impl again!
In the old solver, we don't end up computing the `type_of` an impl candidate if its where clauses don't hold, since this select call would fail before confirming the projection candidate:
d7ea436a02/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/project.rs (L882)
This PR makes the new solver more consistent with the old solver by adding a call to `try_evaluate_added_goals` after regstering the impl predicates, which causes us to bail before computing the `type_of` for impls if the impl definitely doesn't apply.
r? lcnr
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/185
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #140056 (Fix a wrong error message in 2024 edition)
- #140220 (Fix detection of main function if there are expressions around it)
- #140249 (Remove `weak` alias terminology)
- #140316 (Introduce `BoxMarker` to improve pretty-printing correctness)
- #140347 (ci: clean more disk space in codebuild)
- #140349 (ci: use aws codebuild for the `dist-x86_64-linux` job)
- #140379 (rustc-dev-guide subtree update)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Remove `weak` alias terminology
I find the "weak" alias terminology to be quite confusing. It implies the existence of "strong" aliases (which do not exist) and I'm not really sure what about weak aliases is "weak". I much prefer "free alias" as the term. I think it's much more obvious what it means as "free function" is a well defined term that already exists in rust.
It's also a little confusing given "weak alias" is already a term in linker/codegen spaces which are part of the compiler too. Though I'm not particularly worried about that as it's usually very obvious if you're talking about the type system or not lol. I'm also currently trying to write documentation about aliases and it's somewhat awkward/confusing to be talking about *weak* aliases, when I'm not really sure what the basis for that as the term actually *is*.
I would also be happy to just find out there's a nice meaning behind calling them "weak" aliases :-)
r? `@oli-obk`
maybe we want a types MCP to decide on a specific naming here? or maybe we think its just too late to go back on this naming decision ^^'
Remove comment about handling non-global where bounds with corresponding projection
This comment is no longer relevant since we only assemble rigid projections if no param-env candidates hold.
Also remove a stray comment from the old solver.
r? lcnr
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
stepping into impls for normalization is unproductive
See the inline comment. This builds on the reasoning from #136824 (https://gist.github.com/lcnr/c49d887bbd34f5d05c36d1cf7a1bf5a5). Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/176.
Looking at the end of the gist:
> The only ways to project out of a constructor are the following:
> - accessing an associated item, either its type or its item bounds
> - accessing super predicates
Detecting cases where we accessing the type of an associated item is easy, it's simply when we normalize. I don't yet know how to detect whether we step out of an impl by accessing item bounds. Once we also detect these cases we should be able to soundly support arbitrary coinductive traits. Luckily this does not matter for this PR :>
r? `@compiler-errors` cc `@nikomatsakis`
Rigidly project missing item due to guaranteed impossible sized predicate
This is a somewhat involved change, but it amounts to treating missing impl items due to guaranteed impossible where clauses (dyn/str/slice sized, cc #135480) as *rigid projections* rather than projecting to an error term, since that was preventing either reporting a proper error (in an empty param env) *or* successfully type checking the code (in the presence of trivially false where clauses).
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138970
r? `@lcnr` `@oli-obk`
