Rollup merge of #93175 - spastorino:negative-traits-coherence-new, r=nikomatsakis
Implement stable overlap check considering negative traits This PR implement the new disjointness rules for overlap check described in https://rust-lang.github.io/negative-impls-initiative/explainer/coherence-check.html#new-disjointness-rules r? ``@nikomatsakis``
This commit is contained in:
commit
3d6f276ca7
@ -697,6 +697,7 @@ pub struct BuiltinAttribute {
|
||||
rustc_attr!(TEST, rustc_capture_analysis, Normal, template!(Word), WarnFollowing),
|
||||
rustc_attr!(TEST, rustc_insignificant_dtor, Normal, template!(Word), WarnFollowing),
|
||||
rustc_attr!(TEST, rustc_strict_coherence, Normal, template!(Word), WarnFollowing),
|
||||
rustc_attr!(TEST, rustc_with_negative_coherence, Normal, template!(Word), WarnFollowing),
|
||||
rustc_attr!(TEST, rustc_variance, Normal, template!(Word), WarnFollowing),
|
||||
rustc_attr!(TEST, rustc_layout, Normal, template!(List: "field1, field2, ..."), WarnFollowing),
|
||||
rustc_attr!(TEST, rustc_regions, Normal, template!(Word), WarnFollowing),
|
||||
|
@ -1204,6 +1204,7 @@
|
||||
rustc_trivial_field_reads,
|
||||
rustc_unsafe_specialization_marker,
|
||||
rustc_variance,
|
||||
rustc_with_negative_coherence,
|
||||
rustdoc,
|
||||
rustdoc_internals,
|
||||
rustfmt,
|
||||
|
@ -7,9 +7,11 @@
|
||||
use crate::infer::{CombinedSnapshot, InferOk, TyCtxtInferExt};
|
||||
use crate::traits::query::evaluate_obligation::InferCtxtExt;
|
||||
use crate::traits::select::IntercrateAmbiguityCause;
|
||||
use crate::traits::util::impl_trait_ref_and_oblig;
|
||||
use crate::traits::SkipLeakCheck;
|
||||
use crate::traits::{
|
||||
self, Normalized, Obligation, ObligationCause, PredicateObligation, SelectionContext,
|
||||
self, FulfillmentContext, Normalized, Obligation, ObligationCause, PredicateObligation,
|
||||
PredicateObligations, SelectionContext,
|
||||
};
|
||||
use rustc_hir::def_id::{DefId, LOCAL_CRATE};
|
||||
use rustc_middle::ty::fast_reject::{self, SimplifyParams, StripReferences};
|
||||
@ -135,45 +137,83 @@ fn with_fresh_ty_vars<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
header
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/// What kind of overlap check are we doing -- this exists just for testing and feature-gating
|
||||
/// purposes.
|
||||
#[derive(Copy, Clone, PartialEq, Eq, Hash, Debug)]
|
||||
enum OverlapMode {
|
||||
/// The 1.0 rules (either types fail to unify, or where clauses are not implemented for crate-local types)
|
||||
Stable,
|
||||
/// Feature-gated test: Stable, *or* there is an explicit negative impl that rules out one of the where-clauses.
|
||||
WithNegative,
|
||||
/// Just check for negative impls, not for "where clause not implemented": used for testing.
|
||||
Strict,
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
impl OverlapMode {
|
||||
fn use_negative_impl(&self) -> bool {
|
||||
*self == OverlapMode::Strict || *self == OverlapMode::WithNegative
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn use_implicit_negative(&self) -> bool {
|
||||
*self == OverlapMode::Stable || *self == OverlapMode::WithNegative
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn overlap_mode<'tcx>(tcx: TyCtxt<'tcx>, impl1_def_id: DefId, impl2_def_id: DefId) -> OverlapMode {
|
||||
if tcx.has_attr(impl1_def_id, sym::rustc_strict_coherence)
|
||||
!= tcx.has_attr(impl2_def_id, sym::rustc_strict_coherence)
|
||||
{
|
||||
bug!("Use strict coherence on both impls",);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if tcx.has_attr(impl1_def_id, sym::rustc_with_negative_coherence)
|
||||
!= tcx.has_attr(impl2_def_id, sym::rustc_with_negative_coherence)
|
||||
{
|
||||
bug!("Use with negative coherence on both impls",);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if tcx.has_attr(impl1_def_id, sym::rustc_strict_coherence) {
|
||||
OverlapMode::Strict
|
||||
} else if tcx.has_attr(impl1_def_id, sym::rustc_with_negative_coherence) {
|
||||
OverlapMode::WithNegative
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
OverlapMode::Stable
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/// Can both impl `a` and impl `b` be satisfied by a common type (including
|
||||
/// where-clauses)? If so, returns an `ImplHeader` that unifies the two impls.
|
||||
fn overlap<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &mut SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
skip_leak_check: SkipLeakCheck,
|
||||
a_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
b_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
impl1_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
impl2_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
) -> Option<OverlapResult<'tcx>> {
|
||||
debug!("overlap(a_def_id={:?}, b_def_id={:?})", a_def_id, b_def_id);
|
||||
debug!("overlap(impl1_def_id={:?}, impl2_def_id={:?})", impl1_def_id, impl2_def_id);
|
||||
|
||||
selcx.infcx().probe_maybe_skip_leak_check(skip_leak_check.is_yes(), |snapshot| {
|
||||
overlap_within_probe(selcx, skip_leak_check, a_def_id, b_def_id, snapshot)
|
||||
overlap_within_probe(selcx, skip_leak_check, impl1_def_id, impl2_def_id, snapshot)
|
||||
})
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn overlap_within_probe<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &mut SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
skip_leak_check: SkipLeakCheck,
|
||||
a_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
b_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
impl1_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
impl2_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
snapshot: &CombinedSnapshot<'_, 'tcx>,
|
||||
) -> Option<OverlapResult<'tcx>> {
|
||||
fn loose_check<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &mut SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
o: &PredicateObligation<'tcx>,
|
||||
) -> bool {
|
||||
!selcx.predicate_may_hold_fatal(o)
|
||||
}
|
||||
let infcx = selcx.infcx();
|
||||
let tcx = infcx.tcx;
|
||||
|
||||
fn strict_check<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
o: &PredicateObligation<'tcx>,
|
||||
) -> bool {
|
||||
let infcx = selcx.infcx();
|
||||
let tcx = infcx.tcx;
|
||||
o.flip_polarity(tcx)
|
||||
.as_ref()
|
||||
.map(|o| selcx.infcx().predicate_must_hold_modulo_regions(o))
|
||||
.unwrap_or(false)
|
||||
let overlap_mode = overlap_mode(tcx, impl1_def_id, impl2_def_id);
|
||||
|
||||
if overlap_mode.use_negative_impl() {
|
||||
if negative_impl(selcx, impl1_def_id, impl2_def_id)
|
||||
|| negative_impl(selcx, impl2_def_id, impl1_def_id)
|
||||
{
|
||||
return None;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
// For the purposes of this check, we don't bring any placeholder
|
||||
@ -182,26 +222,61 @@ fn strict_check<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
// empty environment.
|
||||
let param_env = ty::ParamEnv::empty();
|
||||
|
||||
let a_impl_header = with_fresh_ty_vars(selcx, param_env, a_def_id);
|
||||
let b_impl_header = with_fresh_ty_vars(selcx, param_env, b_def_id);
|
||||
let impl1_header = with_fresh_ty_vars(selcx, param_env, impl1_def_id);
|
||||
let impl2_header = with_fresh_ty_vars(selcx, param_env, impl2_def_id);
|
||||
|
||||
debug!("overlap: a_impl_header={:?}", a_impl_header);
|
||||
debug!("overlap: b_impl_header={:?}", b_impl_header);
|
||||
|
||||
// Do `a` and `b` unify? If not, no overlap.
|
||||
let obligations = match selcx
|
||||
.infcx()
|
||||
.at(&ObligationCause::dummy(), param_env)
|
||||
.eq_impl_headers(&a_impl_header, &b_impl_header)
|
||||
{
|
||||
Ok(InferOk { obligations, value: () }) => obligations,
|
||||
Err(_) => {
|
||||
return None;
|
||||
}
|
||||
};
|
||||
debug!("overlap: impl1_header={:?}", impl1_header);
|
||||
debug!("overlap: impl2_header={:?}", impl2_header);
|
||||
|
||||
let obligations = equate_impl_headers(selcx, &impl1_header, &impl2_header)?;
|
||||
debug!("overlap: unification check succeeded");
|
||||
|
||||
if overlap_mode.use_implicit_negative() {
|
||||
if implicit_negative(selcx, param_env, &impl1_header, impl2_header, obligations) {
|
||||
return None;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if !skip_leak_check.is_yes() {
|
||||
if infcx.leak_check(true, snapshot).is_err() {
|
||||
debug!("overlap: leak check failed");
|
||||
return None;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
let intercrate_ambiguity_causes = selcx.take_intercrate_ambiguity_causes();
|
||||
debug!("overlap: intercrate_ambiguity_causes={:#?}", intercrate_ambiguity_causes);
|
||||
|
||||
let involves_placeholder =
|
||||
matches!(selcx.infcx().region_constraints_added_in_snapshot(snapshot), Some(true));
|
||||
|
||||
let impl_header = selcx.infcx().resolve_vars_if_possible(impl1_header);
|
||||
Some(OverlapResult { impl_header, intercrate_ambiguity_causes, involves_placeholder })
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
fn equate_impl_headers<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &mut SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
impl1_header: &ty::ImplHeader<'tcx>,
|
||||
impl2_header: &ty::ImplHeader<'tcx>,
|
||||
) -> Option<PredicateObligations<'tcx>> {
|
||||
// Do `a` and `b` unify? If not, no overlap.
|
||||
selcx
|
||||
.infcx()
|
||||
.at(&ObligationCause::dummy(), ty::ParamEnv::empty())
|
||||
.eq_impl_headers(impl1_header, impl2_header)
|
||||
.map(|infer_ok| infer_ok.obligations)
|
||||
.ok()
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/// Given impl1 and impl2 check if both impls can be satisfied by a common type (including
|
||||
/// where-clauses) If so, return false, otherwise return true, they are disjoint.
|
||||
fn implicit_negative<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &mut SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
param_env: ty::ParamEnv<'tcx>,
|
||||
impl1_header: &ty::ImplHeader<'tcx>,
|
||||
impl2_header: ty::ImplHeader<'tcx>,
|
||||
obligations: PredicateObligations<'tcx>,
|
||||
) -> bool {
|
||||
// There's no overlap if obligations are unsatisfiable or if the obligation negated is
|
||||
// satisfied.
|
||||
//
|
||||
@ -225,11 +300,11 @@ fn strict_check<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
// at some point an impl for `&'?a str: Error` could be added.
|
||||
let infcx = selcx.infcx();
|
||||
let tcx = infcx.tcx;
|
||||
let opt_failing_obligation = a_impl_header
|
||||
let opt_failing_obligation = impl1_header
|
||||
.predicates
|
||||
.iter()
|
||||
.copied()
|
||||
.chain(b_impl_header.predicates)
|
||||
.chain(impl2_header.predicates)
|
||||
.map(|p| infcx.resolve_vars_if_possible(p))
|
||||
.map(|p| Obligation {
|
||||
cause: ObligationCause::dummy(),
|
||||
@ -239,15 +314,7 @@ fn strict_check<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
})
|
||||
.chain(obligations)
|
||||
.find(|o| {
|
||||
// if both impl headers are set to strict coherence it means that this will be accepted
|
||||
// only if it's stated that T: !Trait. So only prove that the negated obligation holds.
|
||||
if tcx.has_attr(a_def_id, sym::rustc_strict_coherence)
|
||||
&& tcx.has_attr(b_def_id, sym::rustc_strict_coherence)
|
||||
{
|
||||
strict_check(selcx, o)
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
loose_check(selcx, o) || tcx.features().negative_impls && strict_check(selcx, o)
|
||||
}
|
||||
loose_check(selcx, o) || tcx.features().negative_impls && negative_impl_exists(selcx, o)
|
||||
});
|
||||
// FIXME: the call to `selcx.predicate_may_hold_fatal` above should be ported
|
||||
// to the canonical trait query form, `infcx.predicate_may_hold`, once
|
||||
@ -255,24 +322,97 @@ fn strict_check<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
|
||||
if let Some(failing_obligation) = opt_failing_obligation {
|
||||
debug!("overlap: obligation unsatisfiable {:?}", failing_obligation);
|
||||
return None;
|
||||
true
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
false
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if !skip_leak_check.is_yes() {
|
||||
if infcx.leak_check(true, snapshot).is_err() {
|
||||
debug!("overlap: leak check failed");
|
||||
return None;
|
||||
/// Given impl1 and impl2 check if both impls are never satisfied by a common type (including
|
||||
/// where-clauses) If so, return true, they are disjoint and false otherwise.
|
||||
fn negative_impl<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &mut SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
impl1_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
impl2_def_id: DefId,
|
||||
) -> bool {
|
||||
let tcx = selcx.infcx().tcx;
|
||||
|
||||
// create a parameter environment corresponding to a (placeholder) instantiation of impl1
|
||||
let impl1_env = tcx.param_env(impl1_def_id);
|
||||
let impl1_trait_ref = tcx.impl_trait_ref(impl1_def_id).unwrap();
|
||||
|
||||
// Create an infcx, taking the predicates of impl1 as assumptions:
|
||||
tcx.infer_ctxt().enter(|infcx| {
|
||||
// Normalize the trait reference. The WF rules ought to ensure
|
||||
// that this always succeeds.
|
||||
let impl1_trait_ref = match traits::fully_normalize(
|
||||
&infcx,
|
||||
FulfillmentContext::new(),
|
||||
ObligationCause::dummy(),
|
||||
impl1_env,
|
||||
impl1_trait_ref,
|
||||
) {
|
||||
Ok(impl1_trait_ref) => impl1_trait_ref,
|
||||
Err(err) => {
|
||||
bug!("failed to fully normalize {:?}: {:?}", impl1_trait_ref, err);
|
||||
}
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
// Attempt to prove that impl2 applies, given all of the above.
|
||||
let selcx = &mut SelectionContext::new(&infcx);
|
||||
let impl2_substs = infcx.fresh_substs_for_item(DUMMY_SP, impl2_def_id);
|
||||
let (impl2_trait_ref, obligations) =
|
||||
impl_trait_ref_and_oblig(selcx, impl1_env, impl2_def_id, impl2_substs);
|
||||
|
||||
// do the impls unify? If not, not disjoint.
|
||||
let more_obligations = match infcx
|
||||
.at(&ObligationCause::dummy(), impl1_env)
|
||||
.eq(impl1_trait_ref, impl2_trait_ref)
|
||||
{
|
||||
Ok(InferOk { obligations, .. }) => obligations,
|
||||
Err(_) => {
|
||||
debug!(
|
||||
"explicit_disjoint: {:?} does not unify with {:?}",
|
||||
impl1_trait_ref, impl2_trait_ref
|
||||
);
|
||||
return false;
|
||||
}
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
let opt_failing_obligation = obligations
|
||||
.into_iter()
|
||||
.chain(more_obligations)
|
||||
.find(|o| negative_impl_exists(selcx, o));
|
||||
|
||||
if let Some(failing_obligation) = opt_failing_obligation {
|
||||
debug!("overlap: obligation unsatisfiable {:?}", failing_obligation);
|
||||
true
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
false
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
})
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
let impl_header = selcx.infcx().resolve_vars_if_possible(a_impl_header);
|
||||
let intercrate_ambiguity_causes = selcx.take_intercrate_ambiguity_causes();
|
||||
debug!("overlap: intercrate_ambiguity_causes={:#?}", intercrate_ambiguity_causes);
|
||||
fn loose_check<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &mut SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
o: &PredicateObligation<'tcx>,
|
||||
) -> bool {
|
||||
!selcx.predicate_may_hold_fatal(o)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
let involves_placeholder =
|
||||
matches!(selcx.infcx().region_constraints_added_in_snapshot(snapshot), Some(true));
|
||||
|
||||
Some(OverlapResult { impl_header, intercrate_ambiguity_causes, involves_placeholder })
|
||||
fn negative_impl_exists<'cx, 'tcx>(
|
||||
selcx: &SelectionContext<'cx, 'tcx>,
|
||||
o: &PredicateObligation<'tcx>,
|
||||
) -> bool {
|
||||
let infcx = selcx.infcx();
|
||||
let tcx = infcx.tcx;
|
||||
o.flip_polarity(tcx)
|
||||
.as_ref()
|
||||
.map(|o| {
|
||||
// FIXME This isn't quite correct, regions should be included
|
||||
selcx.infcx().predicate_must_hold_modulo_regions(o)
|
||||
})
|
||||
.unwrap_or(false)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
pub fn trait_ref_is_knowable<'tcx>(
|
||||
|
8
src/test/ui/coherence/auxiliary/option_future.rs
Normal file
8
src/test/ui/coherence/auxiliary/option_future.rs
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
|
||||
#![crate_type = "lib"]
|
||||
#![feature(negative_impls)]
|
||||
#![feature(rustc_attrs)]
|
||||
|
||||
pub trait Future {}
|
||||
|
||||
#[rustc_with_negative_coherence]
|
||||
impl<E> !Future for Option<E> where E: Sized {}
|
18
src/test/ui/coherence/coherence-overlap-negative-trait2.rs
Normal file
18
src/test/ui/coherence/coherence-overlap-negative-trait2.rs
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
|
||||
// check-pass
|
||||
// aux-build:option_future.rs
|
||||
//
|
||||
// Check that if we promise to not impl what would overlap it doesn't actually overlap
|
||||
|
||||
#![feature(rustc_attrs)]
|
||||
|
||||
extern crate option_future as lib;
|
||||
use lib::Future;
|
||||
|
||||
trait Termination {}
|
||||
|
||||
#[rustc_with_negative_coherence]
|
||||
impl<E> Termination for Option<E> where E: Sized {}
|
||||
#[rustc_with_negative_coherence]
|
||||
impl<F> Termination for F where F: Future + Sized {}
|
||||
|
||||
fn main() {}
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user