Add `ConstKind::Expr`
Starting to implement `ty::ConstKind::Abstract`, most of the match cases are stubbed out, some I was unsure what to add, others I didn't want to add until a more complete implementation was ready.
r? `@lcnr`
Initial pass at expr/abstract const/s
Address comments
Switch to using a list instead of &[ty::Const], rm `AbstractConst`
Remove try_unify_abstract_consts
Update comments
Add edits
Recurse more
More edits
Prevent equating associated consts
Move failing test to ui
Changes this test from incremental to ui, and mark it as failing and a known bug.
Does not cause the compiler to ICE, so should be ok.
Avoid reporting overflow in `is_impossible_method`
Fixes#100620
We're evaluating a new predicate in a different param-env than it was checked during typeck, so be more careful about handling overflow errors. Instead of using `FulfillmentCtxt`, using `InferCtxt::evaluate_obligation` by itself will give us back the overflow error, so we can throw it away properly.
This may give us more false-positives, but it doesn't regress the `<HashMap as Iterator>::rev` example that originally motivated adding `is_impossible_method` in the first place.
Coherence negative impls implied bounds
Fixes#93875
This PR is rebased on top of #100789 and it would need to include that one which is already r+ed.
r? ``@nikomatsakis``
cc ``@lcnr`` (which I've talked about 3222f420d9, I guess after you finish your reordering of modules and work with OutlivesEnvironmentEnv this commit can just be reverted).
Don't document impossible to call default trait items on impls
Closes#100176
This only skips documenting _default_ trait items on impls, not ones that are written inside the impl block. This is a conservative approach, since I think we should document all items written in an impl block (I guess unless hidden or whatever), but the existence of this new query I added makes this easy to extend to other rustdoc cases.
Use `TraitEngine` in more places that don't specifically need `FulfillmentContext::new_in_snapshot`
Not sure if this change is worthwhile, but couldn't hurt re: chalkification
r? types
