remove `commit_unconditionally`
`commit_unconditionally` is a noop unless we somehow inspect the current state of our snapshot. The only thing which does that is the leak check which was only used in one place where `commit_if_ok` is probably at least as, or even more, correct.
r? rust-lang/types
make `PlaceholderConst` not store the type of the const
Currently the `Placeholder` variant on `ConstKind` is 28 bytes when with this PR its 8 bytes, i am not sure this is really useful at all rn since `Unevaluated` and `Value` variants are huge still but eventually it should be possible to get both down to 16 bytes 🤔. Mostly opening this to see if this change has any perf impact when done before it can make `ConstKind`/`ConstS` smaller
`codegen_fulfill_obligation` expect erased regions
it's a query, so by erasing regions before calling it, we get better caching.
This doesn't actually change anything as its already the status quo.
use `check_region_obligations_and_report_errors` to avoid ICEs
If we don't call `process_registered_region_obligations` before `resolve_regions_and_report_errors` then we'll ICE if we have any region obligations, and `check_region_obligations_and_report_errors` just does both of these for us in a nice convenient function.
Fixes#53475
r? types
Check that RPITs constrained by a recursive call in a closure are compatible
Fixes#99073
Adapts a similar visitor pattern to `find_opaque_ty_constraints` (that we use to check TAITs), but with some changes:
0. Only walk the "OnlyBody" children, instead of all items in the RPIT's defining scope
1. Only walk through the body's children if we found a constraining usage
2. Don't actually do any inference, just do a comparison and error if they're mismatched
----
r? `@oli-obk` -- you know all this impl-trait stuff best... is this the right approach? I can explain the underlying issue better if you'd like, in case that might reveal a better solution. Not sure if it's possible to gather up the closure's defining usages of the RPIT while borrowck'ing the outer function, that might be a better place to put this check...
Use full type name instead of just saying `impl Trait` in "captures lifetime" error
I think this is very useful, especially when there's >1 `impl Trait`, and it just means passing around a bit more info that we already have access to.
handle consts with param/infer in `const_eval_resolve` better
This PR addresses [this thread here](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/99449#discussion_r924141230). Was this the change you were looking for ``@lcnr?``
Interestingly, one test has begun to pass. Was that expected?
r? ``@lcnr``
Improve suggestions for returning binding
Fixes#99525
Also reworks the cause codes for match and if a bit, I think cleaning them up in a positive way.
We no longer need to call `could_remove_semicolon` in successful code, which might save a few cycles?
Remove the unused StableSet and StableMap types from rustc_data_structures.
The current implementation is not "stable" in the same sense that `HashStable` and `StableHasher` are stable, i.e. across compilation sessions. So, in my opinion, it's better to remove those types (which are basically unused anyway) than to give the wrong impression that these are safe for incr. comp.
I plan to provide new "stable" collection types soon that can be used to replace `FxHashMap` and `FxHashSet` in query results (see [draft](69d03ac7a7)). It's unsound that `HashMap` and `HashSet` implement `HashStable` (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/98890 for a recent P-critical bug caused by this) -- so we should make some progress there.
Formalize defining_use_anchor
This tackles issue #57961
Introduces new enum called `DefiningAnchor` that replaces `Option<LocalDefId>` of `defining_use_anchor`. Now every use of it is explicit and exhaustively matched, catching errors like one in the linked issue. This is not a perfect fix but it's a step in the right direction.
r? `@oli-obk`
Do not allow typeck children items to constrain outer RPITs
Fixes#99073 in a simpler and more conservative way than #99079. Simply raise a mismatched types error if we try to constrain an RPIT in an item that isn't the RPIT's parent.
r? `@oli-obk`
Remove some usages of `guess_head_span`
No need to pass things through `guess_head_span` if they already point to the head span.
Only major change is that we point to the head span of `enum`s on some errors now, which I prefer.
r? `@cjgillot`
Move abstract const to middle
Moves AbstractConst (and all associated methods) to rustc middle for use in `rustc_infer`.
This allows for const resolution in infer to use abstract consts to walk consts and check if
they are resolvable.
This attempts to resolve the issue where `Foo<{ concrete const }, generic T>` is incorrectly marked as conflicting, and is independent from the other issue where nested abstract consts must be resolved.
r? `@lcnr`
Implement `for<>` lifetime binder for closures
This PR implements RFC 3216 ([TI](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/97362)) and allows code like the following:
```rust
let _f = for<'a, 'b> |a: &'a A, b: &'b B| -> &'b C { b.c(a) };
// ^^^^^^^^^^^--- new!
```
cc ``@Aaron1011`` ``@cjgillot``
don't use `commit_if_ok` during `higher_ranked_sub`
This snapshot doesn't really do anything useful for us, especially once we deal with placeholder outlive bounds during trait solving.
I guess that currently the idea is that `higher_ranked_sub` could cause a later `leak_check` to fail even if the combine operation isn't actually relevant. But really, using combine outside of snapshot and ignoring its result is wrong anyways, as it can constrain inference variables.
r? rust-lang/types
don't succeed `evaluate_obligation` query if new opaque types were registered
fixes#98608fixes#98604
The root cause of all this is that in type flag computation we entirely ignore nongeneric things like struct fields and the signature of function items. So if a flag had to be set for a struct if it is set for a field, that will only happen if the field is generic, as only the generic parameters are checked.
I now believe we cannot use type flags to handle opaque types. They seem like the wrong tool for this.
Instead, this PR replaces the previous logic by adding a new variant of `EvaluatedToOk`: `EvaluatedToOkModuloOpaqueTypes`, which says that there were some opaque types that got hidden types bound, but that binding may not have been legal (because we don't know if the opaque type was in its defining scope or not).
