Note that the caller chooses a type for type param
```
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> $DIR/return-impl-trait.rs:23:5
|
LL | fn other_bounds<T>() -> T
| - -
| | |
| | expected `T` because of return type
| | help: consider using an impl return type: `impl Trait`
| expected this type parameter
...
LL | ()
| ^^ expected type parameter `T`, found `()`
|
= note: expected type parameter `T`
found unit type `()`
= note: the caller chooses the type of T which can be different from ()
```
Tried to see if "expected this type parameter" can be replaced, but that goes all the way to `rustc_infer` so seems not worth the effort and can affect other diagnostics.
Revives #112088 and #104755.
Make `type_ascribe!` not a built-in
The only weird thing is the macro expansion note. I wonder if we should suppress these 🤔
r? ````@fmease```` since you told me about builtin# lol
```
error: `S2<'_>` is forbidden as the type of a const generic parameter
--> $DIR/lifetime-in-const-param.rs:5:23
|
LL | struct S<'a, const N: S2>(&'a ());
| ^^
|
= note: the only supported types are integers, `bool` and `char`
help: add `#![feature(adt_const_params)]` to the crate attributes to enable more complex and user defined types
|
LL + #![feature(adt_const_params)]
|
```
Fix#55941.
By just emitting them immediately, because it does happen in practice,
when errors are downgraded to delayed bugs.
We already had one case in `lint.rs` where we handled this at the
callsite. This commit changes things so it's handled within
`stash_diagnostic` instead, because #121812 identified a second case,
and it's possible there are more.
Fixes#121812.
Always evaluate free constants and statics, even if previous errors occurred
work towards https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/79738
We will need to evaluate static items before the `definitions.freeze()` below, as we will start creating new `DefId`s (for nested allocations) within the `eval_static_initializer` query.
But even without that motivation, this is a good change. Hard errors should always be reported and not silenced if other errors happened earlier.
Change leak check and suspicious auto trait lint warning messages
The leak check lint message "this was previously accepted by the compiler but is being phased out; it will become a hard error in a future release!" is misleading as some cases may not be phased out and could end being accepted. This is under discussion still.
The suspicious auto trait lint the change in behavior already happened, so the new message is probably more accurate.
r? `@lcnr`
Closes#93367
Loosen an assertion to account for stashed errors.
The meaning of this assertion changed in #120828 when the meaning of `has_errors` changed to exclude stashed errors. Evidently the new meaning is too restrictive.
Fixes#120856.
r? ```@oli-obk```
The meaning of this assertion changed in #120828 when the meaning of
`has_errors` changed to exclude stashed errors. Evidently the new
meaning is too restrictive.
Fixes#120856.
Expand the primary span of E0277 when the immediate unmet bound is not what the user wrote:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `i32: Bar` is not satisfied
--> f100.rs:6:6
|
6 | <i32 as Foo>::foo();
| ^^^ the trait `Bar` is not implemented for `i32`, which is required by `i32: Foo`
|
help: this trait has no implementations, consider adding one
--> f100.rs:2:1
|
2 | trait Bar {}
| ^^^^^^^^^
note: required for `i32` to implement `Foo`
--> f100.rs:3:14
|
3 | impl<T: Bar> Foo for T {}
| --- ^^^ ^
| |
| unsatisfied trait bound introduced here
```
Fix#40120.
Remove `track_errors` entirely
follow up to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119869
r? `@matthewjasper`
There are some diagnostic changes adding new diagnostics or not emitting some anymore. We can improve upon that in follow-up work imo.
When encountering
```rust
let _ = if true {
Struct
} else {
foo() // -> Box<dyn Trait>
};
```
if `Struct` implements `Trait`, suggest boxing the then arm tail expression.
Part of #102629.
