make define_opaque_types fully explicit
#109166
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred to the core trait solver cc @rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor Some changes occurred in engine.rs, potentially modifying the public API of |
lcnr
changed the title
define_opaque_types explicitdefine_opaque_types fully explicit
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2023
… r=oli-obk make `define_opaque_types` fully explicit based on the idea of rust-lang#108389. Moved `define_opaque_types` into the actual operations, e.g. `eq`, instead of `infcx.at` because normalization doesn't use `define_opaque_types` and even creates it's own `At` with a different `define_opaque_types` internally. Somewhat surprisingly, coherence actually relies on `DefineOpaqueTypes::Yes` for soundness which was revealed because I've incorrectly used `DefineOpaqueTypes::No` in `equate_impl_headers`. It feels concerning that even though this is the case, we still sometimes use `DefineOpaqueTypes::No` in coherence. I did not look into this as part of this PR as it is purely changing the structure of the code without changing behavior in any way. r? `@oli-obk`
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 16, 2023
… r=oli-obk make `define_opaque_types` fully explicit based on the idea of rust-lang#108389. Moved `define_opaque_types` into the actual operations, e.g. `eq`, instead of `infcx.at` because normalization doesn't use `define_opaque_types` and even creates it's own `At` with a different `define_opaque_types` internally. Somewhat surprisingly, coherence actually relies on `DefineOpaqueTypes::Yes` for soundness which was revealed because I've incorrectly used `DefineOpaqueTypes::No` in `equate_impl_headers`. It feels concerning that even though this is the case, we still sometimes use `DefineOpaqueTypes::No` in coherence. I did not look into this as part of this PR as it is purely changing the structure of the code without changing behavior in any way. r? ``@oli-obk``
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 16, 2023
…iaskrgr Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#108875 (rustdoc: fix type search for `Option` combinators) - rust-lang#108971 (error-msg: impl better suggestion for `E0532`) - rust-lang#109139 (rustdoc: DocFS: Replace rayon with threadpool and enable it for all targets) - rust-lang#109151 (Assert def-kind is correct for alias types) - rust-lang#109158 (error-msg: expand suggestion for `unused_def` lint) - rust-lang#109166 (make `define_opaque_types` fully explicit) - rust-lang#109171 (Some cleanups in our normalization logic) - rust-lang#109180 (Unequal → Not equal) - rust-lang#109185 (rustdoc: remove `std::` from primitive intra-doc link tooltips) - rust-lang#109192 (Mention UEFI target promotion in release notes for 1.67.0) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
based on the idea of #108389. Moved
define_opaque_typesinto the actual operations, e.g.eq, instead ofinfcx.atbecause normalization doesn't usedefine_opaque_typesand even creates it's ownAtwith a differentdefine_opaque_typesinternally.Somewhat surprisingly, coherence actually relies on
DefineOpaqueTypes::Yesfor soundness which was revealed because I've incorrectly usedDefineOpaqueTypes::Noinequate_impl_headers. It feels concerning that even though this is the case, we still sometimes useDefineOpaqueTypes::Noin coherence. I did not look into this as part of this PR as it is purely changing the structure of the code without changing behavior in any way.r? @oli-obk