Add hint for missing lifetime bound on trait object when type alias is used
Fix issue #103582.
The problem: When a type alias is used to specify the return type of the method in a trait impl, the suggestion for fixing the problem of "missing lifetime bound on trait object" of the trait impl will not be created. The issue caused by the code which searches for the return trait objects when constructing the hint suggestion is not able to find the trait objects since they are specified in the type alias path instead of the return path of the trait impl.
The solution: Trace the trait objects in the type alias path and provide them along with the alias span to generate the suggestion in case the type alias is used in return type of the method in the trait impl.
use LocalDefId instead of HirId in trait resolution to simplify
the obligation clause resolution
Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
Do not filter substs in `remap_generic_params_to_declaration_params`.
The relevant filtering should have been performed by borrowck.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/105826
r? types
Add 'static lifetime suggestion when GAT implied 'static requirement from HRTB
Fix for issue #105507
The problem:
When generic associated types (GATs) are from higher-ranked trait bounds (HRTB), they are implied 'static requirement (see
[Implied 'static requirement from higher-ranked trait bounds](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2022/10/28/gats-stabilization.html#implied-static-requirement-from-higher-ranked-trait-bounds) for more details). If the user did not explicitly specify the `'static` lifetime when using the GAT, the current error message will only point out the type `does not live long enough` where the type is used, but not where the GAT is specified and how to fix the problem.
The solution:
Add notes at the span where the problematic GATs are specified and suggestions of how to fix the problem by adding `'static` lifetime at the right spans.
Unify `Opaque`/`Projection` handling in region outlives code
They share basically identical paths in most places which are even easier to unify now that they're both `ty::Alias`
r? types
Suggest `mut self: &mut Self` for `?Sized` impls
Closes#106325Closes#93078
The suggestion is _probably_ not what the user wants (hence `MaybeIncorrect`) but at least makes the problem in the above issues clearer. It might be better to add a note explaining why this is the case, but I'm not sure how best to word that so this is a start.
``@rustbot`` label +A-diagnostics
Projection types in user annotations may contain inference variables.
This makes the normalization depend on the unification with the actual
type and thus requires a separate TypeOp to track the obligations.
Otherwise simply calling `TypeChecker::normalize` would ICE with
"unexpected ambiguity"
Rename `hir::Map::{get_,find_}parent_node` to `hir::Map::{,opt_}parent_id`, and add `hir::Map::{get,find}_parent`
The `hir::Map::get_parent_node` function doesn't return a `Node`, and I think that's quite confusing. Let's rename it to something that sounds more like something that gets the parent hir id => `hir::Map::parent_id`. Same with `find_parent_node` => `opt_parent_id`.
Also, combine `hir.get(hir.parent_id(hir_id))` and similar `hir.find(hir.parent_id(hir_id))` function into new functions that actually retrieve the parent node in one call. This last commit is the only one that might need to be looked at closely.
