Also consider TAIT to be uncomputable if the MIR body is tainted
Not totally sure if this is the best solution. We could, alternatively, look at the hir typeck results and try to take a type from there instead of just falling back to type error, inferring `u8` instead of `{type error}`. Not certain it really matters, though.
Happy to iterate on this.
Fixes#117413
r? ``@oli-obk`` cc ``@Nadrieril``
Don't normalize to an un-revealed opaque when we hit the recursion limit
Currently, we will normalize `Opaque := Option<&Opaque>` to something like `Option<&Option<&Option<&...Opaque>>>`, hitting a limit and bottoming out in an unnormalized opaque after the recursion limit gets hit.
Unfortunately, during `layout_of`, we'll simply recurse and try again if the type normalizes to something different than the type:
e6e931dda5/compiler/rustc_ty_utils/src/layout.rs (L58-L60)
That means then we'll try to normalize `Option<&Option<&Option<&...Opaque>>>` again, substituting `Opaque` into itself even deeper. Eventually this will get to the point that we're just stack-overflowing on a really deep type before even hitting an opaque again.
To fix this, we just bottom out into `ty::Error` instead of the unrevealed opaque type.
Fixes#117412
r? `@oli-obk`
Lint overlapping ranges as a separate pass
This reworks the [`overlapping_range_endpoints`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/nightly-rustc/rustc_lint_defs/builtin/static.OVERLAPPING_RANGE_ENDPOINTS.html) lint. My motivations are:
- It was annoying to have this lint entangled with the exhaustiveness algorithm, especially wrt librarification;
- This makes the lint behave consistently.
Here's the consistency story. Take the following matches:
```rust
match (0u8, true) {
(0..=10, true) => {}
(10..20, true) => {}
(10..20, false) => {}
_ => {}
}
match (true, 0u8) {
(true, 0..=10) => {}
(true, 10..20) => {}
(false, 10..20) => {}
_ => {}
}
```
There are two semantically consistent options: option 1 we lint all overlaps between the ranges, option 2 we only lint the overlaps that could actually occur (i.e. the ones with `true`). Option 1 is what this PR does. Option 2 is possible but would require the exhaustiveness algorithm to track more things for the sake of the lint. The status quo is that we're inconsistent between the two.
Option 1 generates more false postives, but I prefer it from a maintainer's perspective. I do think the difference is minimal; cases where the difference is observable seem rare.
This PR adds a separate pass, so this will have a perf impact. Let's see how bad, it looked ok locally.
Stash and cancel cycle errors for auto trait leakage in opaques
We don't need to emit a traditional cycle error when we have a selection error that explains what's going on but in more detail.
We may want to augment this error to actually point out the cycle, now that the cycle error is not being emitted. We could do that by storing the set of opaques that was in the `CyclePlaceholder` that gets returned from `type_of_opaque`.
r? `@oli-obk` cc `@estebank` #117235
Rework negative coherence to properly consider impls that only partly overlap
This PR implements a modified negative coherence that handles impls that only have partial overlap.
It does this by:
1. taking both impl trait refs, instantiating them with infer vars
2. equating both trait refs
3. taking the equated trait ref (which represents the two impls' intersection), and resolving any vars
4. plugging all remaining infer vars with placeholder types
these placeholder-plugged trait refs can then be used normally with the new trait solver, since we no longer have to worry about the issue with infer vars in param-envs.
We use the **new trait solver** to reason correctly about unnormalized trait refs (due to deferred projection equality), since this avoid having to normalize anything under param-envs with infer vars in them.
This PR then additionally:
* removes the `FnPtr` knowable hack by implementing proper negative `FnPtr` trait bounds for rigid types.
---
An example:
Consider these two partially overlapping impls:
```
impl<T, U> PartialEq<&U> for &T where T: PartialEq<U> {}
impl<F> PartialEq<F> for F where F: FnPtr {}
```
Under the old algorithm, we would take one of these impls and replace it with infer vars, then try unifying it with the other impl under identity substitutions. This is not possible in either direction, since it either sets `T = U`, or tries to equate `F = &?0`.
Under the new algorithm, we try to unify `?0: PartialEq<?0>` with `&?1: PartialEq<&?2>`. This gives us `?0 = &?1 = &?2` and thus `?1 = ?2`. The intersection of these two trait refs therefore looks like: `&?1: PartialEq<&?1>`. After plugging this with placeholders, we get a trait ref that looks like `&!0: PartialEq<&!0>`, with the first impl having substs `?T = ?U = !0` and the second having substs `?F = &!0`[^1].
Then we can take the param-env from the first impl, and try to prove the negated where clause of the second.
We know that `&!0: !FnPtr` never holds, since it's a rigid type that is also not a fn ptr, we successfully detect that these impls may never overlap.
[^1]: For the purposes of this example, I just ignored lifetimes, since it doesn't really matter.
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #117111 (Remove support for alias `-Z instrument-coverage`)
- #117141 (Require target features to match exactly during inlining)
- #117152 (Fix unwrap suggestion for async fn)
- #117154 (implement C ABI lowering for CSKY)
- #117159 (Work around the fact that `check_mod_type_wf` may spuriously return `ErrorGuaranteed`)
- #117163 (compiletest: Display compilation errors in mir-opt tests)
- #117173 (Make `Iterator` a lang item)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Fix#101351.
When an associated type on a type parameter is used, and the type
parameter isn't constrained by the correct trait, suggest the
appropriate trait bound:
```
error[E0220]: associated type `Associated` not found for `T`
--> file.rs:6:15
|
6 | field: T::Associated,
| ^^^^^^^^^^ there is a similarly named associated type `Associated` in the trait `Foo`
|
help: consider restricting type parameter `T`
|
5 | struct Generic<T: Foo> {
| +++++
```
When an associated type on a type parameter has a typo, suggest fixing
it:
```
error[E0220]: associated type `Baa` not found for `T`
--> $DIR/issue-55673.rs:9:8
|
LL | T::Baa: std::fmt::Debug,
| ^^^ there is a similarly named associated type `Bar` in the trait `Foo`
|
help: change the associated type name to use `Bar` from `Foo`
|
LL | T::Bar: std::fmt::Debug,
| ~~~
```
adjust how closure/generator types are printed
I saw `&[closure@$DIR/issue-20862.rs:2:5]` and I thought it is a slice type, because that's usually what `&[_]` is... it took me a while to realize that this is just a confusing printer and actually there's no slice. Let's use something that cannot be mistaken for a regular type.
Correctly deny late-bound lifetimes from parent in anon consts and TAITs
Reuse the `AnonConstBoundary` scope (introduced in #108553, renamed in this PR to `LateBoundary`) to deny late-bound vars of *all* kinds (ty/const/lifetime) in anon consts and TAITs.
Side-note, but I would like to consolidate this with the error reporting for RPITs (E0657):
c4f25777a0/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/collect/resolve_bound_vars.rs (L733-L754) but the semantics about what we're allowed to capture there are slightly different, so I'm leaving that untouched.
Fixes#115474
Detect cycle errors hidden by opaques during monomorphization
Opaque types may reveal to projections, which themselves normalize to opaques. We don't currently normalize when checking that opaques are cyclical, and we may also not know that the opaque is cyclical until monomorphization (see `tests/ui/type-alias-impl-trait/mututally-recursive-overflow.rs`).
Detect cycle errors in `normalize_projection_ty` and report a fatal overflow (in the old solver). Luckily, this is already detected as a fatal overflow in the new solver.
Fixes#112047
Bubble up opaque <eq> opaque operations instead of picking an order
In case we are in `Bubble` mode (meaning every opaque type that is defined in the current crate is treated as if it were in its defining scope), we don't try to register an opaque type as the hidden type of another opaque type, but instead bubble up an obligation to equate them at the query caller site. Usually that means we have a `DefiningAnchor::Bind` and thus can reliably figure out whether an opaque type is in its defining scope. Where we can't, we'll error out, so the default is sound.
With this change we start using `AliasTyEq` predicates in the old solver, too.
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/108498
But also regresses `tests/ui/impl-trait/anon_scope_creep.rs`. Our use of `Bubble` for `check_opaque_type_well_formed` is going to keep biting us.
r? `@lcnr` `@compiler-errors`
