Tweak suggestions for bare trait used as a type
```
error[E0782]: trait objects must include the `dyn` keyword
--> $DIR/not-on-bare-trait-2021.rs:11:11
|
LL | fn bar(x: Foo) -> Foo {
| ^^^
|
help: use a generic type parameter, constrained by the trait `Foo`
|
LL | fn bar<T: Foo>(x: T) -> Foo {
| ++++++++ ~
help: you can also use `impl Foo`, but users won't be able to specify the type paramer when calling the `fn`, having to rely exclusively on type inference
|
LL | fn bar(x: impl Foo) -> Foo {
| ++++
help: alternatively, use a trait object to accept any type that implements `Foo`, accessing its methods at runtime using dynamic dispatch
|
LL | fn bar(x: &dyn Foo) -> Foo {
| ++++
error[E0782]: trait objects must include the `dyn` keyword
--> $DIR/not-on-bare-trait-2021.rs:11:19
|
LL | fn bar(x: Foo) -> Foo {
| ^^^
|
help: use `impl Foo` to return an opaque type, as long as you return a single underlying type
|
LL | fn bar(x: Foo) -> impl Foo {
| ++++
help: alternatively, you can return an owned trait object
|
LL | fn bar(x: Foo) -> Box<dyn Foo> {
| +++++++ +
```
Fix#119525:
```
error[E0038]: the trait `Ord` cannot be made into an object
--> $DIR/bare-trait-dont-suggest-dyn.rs:3:33
|
LL | fn ord_prefer_dot(s: String) -> Ord {
| ^^^ `Ord` cannot be made into an object
|
note: for a trait to be "object safe" it needs to allow building a vtable to allow the call to be resolvable dynamically; for more information visit <https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/items/traits.html#object-safety>
--> $SRC_DIR/core/src/cmp.rs:LL:COL
|
= note: the trait cannot be made into an object because it uses `Self` as a type parameter
::: $SRC_DIR/core/src/cmp.rs:LL:COL
|
= note: the trait cannot be made into an object because it uses `Self` as a type parameter
help: consider using an opaque type instead
|
LL | fn ord_prefer_dot(s: String) -> impl Ord {
| ++++
```
Reorder check_item_type diagnostics so they occur next to the corresponding `check_well_formed` diagnostics
The first commit is just a cleanup.
The second commit moves most checks from `check_mod_item_types` into `check_well_formed`, invoking the checks in lockstep per-item instead of iterating over all items twice.
Note the parentheses in the last suggestion:
```
error[E0277]: the size for values of type `(dyn Foo + Send + 'static)` cannot be known at compilation time
--> $DIR/not-on-bare-trait.rs:7:8
|
LL | fn foo(_x: Foo + Send) {
| ^^ doesn't have a size known at compile-time
|
= help: the trait `Sized` is not implemented for `(dyn Foo + Send + 'static)`
= help: unsized fn params are gated as an unstable feature
help: you can use `impl Trait` as the argument type
|
LL | fn foo(_x: impl Foo + Send) {
| ++++
help: function arguments must have a statically known size, borrowed types always have a known size
|
LL | fn foo(_x: &(Foo + Send)) {
| ++ +
```
Add the following suggestions:
```
error[E0782]: trait objects must include the `dyn` keyword
--> $DIR/not-on-bare-trait-2021.rs:11:11
|
LL | fn bar(x: Foo) -> Foo {
| ^^^
|
help: use a generic type parameter, constrained by the trait `Foo`
|
LL | fn bar<T: Foo>(x: T) -> Foo {
| ++++++++ ~
help: you can also use `impl Foo`, but users won't be able to specify the type paramer when calling the `fn`, having to rely exclusively on type inference
|
LL | fn bar(x: impl Foo) -> Foo {
| ++++
help: alternatively, use a trait object to accept any type that implements `Foo`, accessing its methods at runtime using dynamic dispatch
|
LL | fn bar(x: &dyn Foo) -> Foo {
| ++++
error[E0782]: trait objects must include the `dyn` keyword
--> $DIR/not-on-bare-trait-2021.rs:11:19
|
LL | fn bar(x: Foo) -> Foo {
| ^^^
|
help: use `impl Foo` to return an opaque type, as long as you return a single underlying type
|
LL | fn bar(x: Foo) -> impl Foo {
| ++++
help: alternatively, you can return an owned trait object
|
LL | fn bar(x: Foo) -> Box<dyn Foo> {
| +++++++ +
```
Simple modification of `non_lifetime_binders`'s diagnostic information to adapt to type binders
fixes#119067
Replace diagnostic information "lifetime bounds cannot be used in this context" to "bounds cannot be used in this context".
```rust
#![allow(incomplete_features)]
#![feature(non_lifetime_binders)]
trait Trait {}
trait Trait2
where for <T: Trait> ():{}
//~^ ERROR bounds cannot be used in this context
```
-Znext-solver: adapt overflow rules to avoid breakage
Do not erase overflow constraints if they are from equating the impl header when normalizing[^1].
This should be the minimal change to not break crates depending on the old project behavior of "apply impl constraints while only lazily evaluating any nested goals".
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/70, see https://hackmd.io/ATf4hN0NRY-w2LIVgeFsVg for the reasoning behind this.
Only keeping constraints on overflow for `normalize-to` goals as that's the only thing needed for backcompat. It also allows us to not track the origin of root obligations. The issue with root goals would be something like the following:
```rust
trait Foo {}
trait Bar {}
trait FooBar {}
impl<T: Foo + Bar> FooBar for T {}
// These two should behave the same, rn we can drop constraints for both,
// but if we don't drop `Misc` goals we would only drop the constraints for
// `FooBar` unless we track origins of root obligations.
fn func1<T: Foo + Bar>() {}
fn func2<T: FooBaz>() {}
```
[^1]: mostly, the actual rules are slightly different
r? ``@compiler-errors``
Collect lang items from AST, get rid of `GenericBound::LangItemTrait`
r? `@cjgillot`
cc #115178
Looking forward, the work to remove `QPath::LangItem` will also be significantly more difficult, but I plan on doing it as well. Specifically, we have to change:
1. A lot of `rustc_ast_lowering` for things like expr `..`
2. A lot of astconv, since we actually instantiate lang and non-lang paths quite differently.
3. A ton of diagnostics and clippy lints that are special-cased via `QPath::LangItem`
Meanwhile, it was pretty easy to remove `GenericBound::LangItemTrait`, so I just did that here.
remove redundant imports
detects redundant imports that can be eliminated.
for #117772 :
In order to facilitate review and modification, split the checking code and removing redundant imports code into two PR.
r? `@petrochenkov`
detects redundant imports that can be eliminated.
for #117772 :
In order to facilitate review and modification, split the checking code and
removing redundant imports code into two PR.
recurse into refs when comparing tys for diagnostics
before:
after:
this diff from the test suite is also quite nice imo:
```diff
`@@` -4,8 +4,8 `@@` error[E0308]: mismatched types
LL | debug_assert_eq!(iter.next(), Some(value));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^ expected `Option<<I as Iterator>::Item>`, found `Option<&<I as Iterator>::Item>`
|
- = note: expected enum `Option<<I as Iterator>::Item>`
- found enum `Option<&<I as Iterator>::Item>`
+ = note: expected enum `Option<_>`
+ found enum `Option<&_>`
```
Provide context when `?` can't be called because of `Result<_, E>`
When a method chain ending in `?` causes an E0277 because the expression's `Result::Err` variant doesn't have a type that can be converted to the `Result<_, E>` type parameter in the return type, provide additional context of which parts of the chain can and can't support the `?` operator.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `String`
--> $DIR/question-mark-result-err-mismatch.rs:27:25
|
LL | fn bar() -> Result<(), String> {
| ------------------ expected `String` because of this
LL | let x = foo();
| ----- this has type `Result<_, String>`
...
LL | .map_err(|_| ())?;
| ---------------^ the trait `From<()>` is not implemented for `String`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<_, ()>`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= help: the following other types implement trait `From<T>`:
<String as From<char>>
<String as From<Box<str>>>
<String as From<Cow<'a, str>>>
<String as From<&str>>
<String as From<&mut str>>
<String as From<&String>>
= note: required for `Result<(), String>` to implement `FromResidual<Result<Infallible, ()>>`
```
Fix#72124.
When a method chain ending in `?` causes an E0277 because the
expression's `Result::Err` variant doesn't have a type that can be
converted to the `Result<_, E>` type parameter in the return type,
provide additional context of which parts of the chain can and can't
support the `?` operator.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `String`
--> $DIR/question-mark-result-err-mismatch.rs:28:25
|
LL | fn bar() -> Result<(), String> {
| ------------------ expected `String` because of this
LL | let x = foo();
| ----- this can be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<String, String>`
LL | let one = x
LL | .map(|s| ())
| ----------- this can be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<(), String>`
LL | .map_err(|_| ())?;
| ---------------^ the trait `From<()>` is not implemented for `String`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<(), ()>`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= help: the following other types implement trait `From<T>`:
<String as From<char>>
<String as From<Box<str>>>
<String as From<Cow<'a, str>>>
<String as From<&str>>
<String as From<&mut str>>
<String as From<&String>>
= note: required for `Result<(), String>` to implement `FromResidual<Result<Infallible, ()>>`
```
Fix#72124.
