Commit Graph

68 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Santiago Pastorino
b2f3198608
Filter out RPITITs in astconv when checking for missing associated types 2023-03-12 10:51:19 -03:00
Santiago Pastorino
b82d6a2e9e
Run existing impl trait in traits tests using -Zlower-impl-trait-in-trait-to-assoc-ty 2023-03-12 10:50:32 -03:00
Santiago Pastorino
8a5574bf62
Remove tests/ui/impl-trait/in-trait/new-lowering-strategy in favor of using revisions on existing tests 2023-03-12 10:50:31 -03:00
bors
9455a5591b Auto merge of #108700 - spastorino:new-rpitit-impl-side-2, r=compiler-errors
Make RPITITs simple cases work when using lower_impl_trait_in_trait_to_assoc_ty

r? `@compiler-errors`

It's probably best reviewed commit by commit.
2023-03-12 00:49:35 +00:00
Arpad Borsos
9f03cfc207
Remove identity_future indirection
This was previously needed because the indirection used to hide some unexplained lifetime errors, which it turned out were related to the `min_choice` algorithm.

Removing the indirection also solves a couple of cycle errors, large moves and makes async blocks support the `#[track_caller]` annotation.
2023-03-08 15:37:14 +01:00
Matthias Krüger
63635880f6
Rollup merge of #108583 - compiler-errors:rpitit-default-method-with-nested-rpitits, r=spastorino
Account for binders correctly when adding default RPITIT method assumption

As of #108203, we install extra projection predicates into the param-env of a default trait method when it has return-position `impl Trait` (or is async).

The implementation didn't account for the fact that it's walking into and out of binders, so we just need to shift all the debruijn indices accordingly when constructing the projection predicates.

Fixes #108579

r? types
2023-03-07 19:57:44 +01:00
Santiago Pastorino
5daa01e4a6
Add simple impl trait test for RPITIT 2023-03-06 14:49:50 -03:00
Michael Goulet
7634c5916a Don't project to RPITIT that has no default value 2023-03-04 18:36:02 +00:00
Santiago Pastorino
12b81a5734
Add simple trait test 2023-03-02 16:48:49 -03:00
Michael Goulet
b7e0ca993d Shift vars for default RPITIT methods correctly 2023-02-28 21:34:59 +00:00
Michael Goulet
ecac8fd5af Descriptive error when users try to combine RPITIT/AFIT with specialization 2023-02-28 02:03:43 +00:00
Michael Goulet
dfc4a580f2 Add a test for default trait method with RPITITs 2023-02-21 02:01:26 +00:00
Esteban Küber
30cf7a3f51 Introduce ReError
CC #69314
2023-02-09 10:26:49 +00:00
Matthias Krüger
480c4a18d5
Rollup merge of #107201 - compiler-errors:confusing-async-fn-note, r=estebank
Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting the wording of the note. The only value I can see in this note is that it points out where the async's opaque future is coming from, but the way it's doing it is misleading IMO.

For example:

```rust
note: while checking the return type of the `async fn`
  --> $DIR/dont-suggest-missing-await.rs:7:24
   |
LL | async fn make_u32() -> u32 {
   |                        ^^^ checked the `Output` of this `async fn`, found opaque type
```

We point at the type `u32` in the HIR, but then say "found opaque type". We also say "while checking"... but we're typechecking a totally different function when we get this type mismatch!

r? ``@estebank`` but feel free to reassign and/or take your time reviewing this. I'd be inclined to also discuss reworking the presentation of this type mismatch to restore some of these labels in a way that makes it more clear what it's trying to point out.
2023-02-02 06:52:13 +01:00
Esteban Küber
62ba3e70a1 Modify primary span label for E0308
The previous output was unintuitive to users.
2023-01-30 20:12:19 +00:00
Michael Goulet
a63f5dce27 Remove confusing 'while checking' note from opaque future type mismatches 2023-01-22 17:02:47 +00:00
Esteban Küber
2024aa48b4 Make &-removal suggestion verbose 2023-01-11 21:38:54 +00:00
Albert Larsan
cf2dff2b1e
Move /src/test to /tests 2023-01-11 09:32:08 +00:00