We don't imply outlives-bounds from the own explicit bounds of a GAT projection #141692
Labels
A-associated-items
Area: Associated items (types, constants & functions)
A-GATs
Area: Generic associated types (GATs)
A-implied-bounds
Area: Implied bounds / inferred outlives-bounds
A-lifetimes
Area: Lifetimes / regions
C-discussion
Category: Discussion or questions that doesn't represent real issues.
P-low
Low priority
T-types
Relevant to the types team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Not sure if worth tracking/discussing. I'm basically revisiting this because of IATs and LTAs. I know that T-types would like to avoid implying outlives-bounds in more places and under more circumstances at least until various soundness issues related to them have been fixed (LTAs prolly being the exception) (via: #t-types > implied bounds for the more recent features? @ 💬 (2023)).
Presently, when inferring outlives-bounds we only consider the explicit predicates of the corresp. trait when looking at projections as noted by this comment (which was written by me):
rust/compiler/rustc_hir_analysis/src/outlives/implicit_infer.rs
Lines 207 to 209 in 77101fe
This means:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: