Rework upcasting confirmation to support upcasting to fewer projections in target bounds
This PR implements a modified trait upcasting algorithm that is resilient to changes in the number of associated types in the bounds of the source and target trait objects.
It does this by equating each bound of the target trait ref individually against the bounds of the source trait ref, rather than doing them all together by constructing a new trait object.
#### The new way we do trait upcasting confirmation
1. Equate the target trait object's principal trait ref with one of the supertraits of the source trait object's principal.
fdcab310b2/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/mod.rs (L2509-L2525)
2. Make sure that every auto trait in the *target* trait object is present in the source trait ref's bounds.
fdcab310b2/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/mod.rs (L2559-L2562)
3. For each projection in the *target* trait object, make sure there is exactly one projection that equates with it in the source trait ref's bound. If there is more than one, bail with ambiguity.
fdcab310b2/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/mod.rs (L2526-L2557)
* Since there may be more than one that applies, we probe first to check that there is exactly one, then we equate it outside of a probe once we know that it's unique.
4. Make sure the lifetime of the source trait object outlives the lifetime of the target.
<details>
<summary>Meanwhile, this is how we used to do upcasting:</summary>
1. For each supertrait of the source trait object, take that supertrait, append the source object's projection bounds, and the *target* trait object's auto trait bounds, and make this into a new object type:
d12c6e947c/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/confirmation.rs (L915-L929)
2. Then equate it with the target trait object:
d12c6e947c/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/confirmation.rs (L936)
This will be a type mismatch if the target trait object has fewer projection bounds, since we compare the bounds structurally in relate:
d12c6e947c/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/relate.rs (L696-L698)
</details>
Fixes#114035
Also fixes#114113, because I added a normalize call in the old solver.
r? types
resolve before canonicalization in new solver, ICE if unresolved
Fold the values with a resolver before canonicalization instead of making it happen within canonicalization.
This allows us to filter trivial region constraints from the external constraints.
r? ``@lcnr``
Rollup of 6 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #114178 (Account for macros when suggesting a new let binding)
- #114199 (Don't unsize coerce infer vars in select in new solver)
- #114301 (Don't check unnecessarily that impl trait is RPIT)
- #114314 (Tweaks to `adt_sized_constraint`)
- #114322 (Fix invalid slice coercion suggestion reported in turbofish)
- #114340 ([rustc_attr][nit] Replace `filter` + `is_some` with `map_or`.)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Fix invalid slice coercion suggestion reported in turbofish
This PR fixes the invalid slice coercion suggestion reported in turbofish and inferred generics by not emitting them.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/110063
Detect trait upcasting through struct tail unsizing in new solver select
Oops, we were able to hide trait upcasting behind a parent unsize goal that evaluated to `Certainty::Yes`. Let's do rematching for `Certainty::Yes` unsize goals with `BuiltinImplSource::Misc` sources (corresponding to all of the other unsize rules) to make sure we end up selecting any nested goals which may be satisfied via `BuiltinImplSource::TraitUpcasting` or `::TupleUnsizing`.
r? ``@lcnr``
Restore region uniquification in the new solver 🎉
All of the bugs that were "due" to uniquification have been settled via other means (e.g. bidirectional alias-relate, param-env incompleteness, etc).
Firstly, revert the functional changes in #110180. 😸
Secondly, we need to ignore regions when considering if a goal has changed (the "has_changed" boolean returned from `evaluate_goal`) -- otherwise, because we're doing region uniquification, we may perpetually consider a goal to be changed. See the UI test I committed for an explanation.
Don't treat negative trait predicates as always knowable
We don't need this. It was added in #90104 but I don't really know why. It's not sound afaict -- negative trait predicates need the same coherence-ambiguity/orphan check rules as positive ones.
r? `@lcnr`
cc `@spastorino,` do you remember why?
Double check that hidden types match the expected hidden type
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/113278 specifically, but I left a TODO for where we should also add some hardening.
It feels a bit like papering over the issue, but at least this way we don't get unsoundness, but just surprising errors. Errors will be improved and given spans before this PR lands.
r? `@compiler-errors` `@lcnr`
rustdoc: handle cross-crate RPITITs correctly
Filter out the internal associated types synthesized during the desugaring of RPITITs, they really shouldn't show up in the docs.
This also fixes#113929 since we're no longer invoking `is_impossible_associated_item` (renamed from `is_impossible_method`) which cannot handle them (leading to an ICE). I don't think it makes sense to try to make `is_impossible_associated_item` handle this exotic kind of associated type (CC original author `@compiler-errors).`
@ T-rustdoc reviewers, currently I'm throwing out ITIT assoc tys before cleaning assoc tys at each usage-site. I'm thinking about making `clean_middle_assoc_item` return an `Option<_>` instead and doing the check inside of it to prevent any call sites from forgetting the check for ITITs. Since I wasn't sure if you would like that approach, I didn't go through with it. Let me know what you think.
<details><summary>Explanation on why <code>is_impossible_associated_item(itit_assoc_ty)</code> leads to an ICE</summary>
Given the following code:
```rs
pub trait Trait { fn def<T>() -> impl Default {} }
impl Trait for () {}
```
The generated associated type looks something like (simplified):
```rs
type {opaque#0}<T>: Default = impl Default; // the name is actually `kw::Empty` but this is the `def_path_str` repr
```
The query `is_impossible_associated_item` goes through all predicates of the associated item – in this case `<T as Sized>` – to check if they contain any generic parameters from the (generic) associated type itself. For predicates that don't contain any *own* generics, it does further processing, part of which is instantiating the predicate with the generic arguments of the impl block (which is only correct if they truly don't contain any own generics since they wouldn't get instantiated this way leading to an ICE).
It checks if `parent_def_id(T) == assoc_ty_def_id` to get to know if `T` is owned by the assoc ty. Unfortunately this doesn't work for ITIT assoc tys. In this case, the parent of `T` is `Trait::def` (!) which is the associated function (I'm pretty sure this is very intentional) which is of course not equal to the assoc ty `Trait::{opaque#0}`.
</details>
`@rustbot` label A-cross-crate-reexports
