Skip to content

Conversation

ChayimFriedman2
Copy link
Contributor

The diff is huge, but it was mostly following the compiler in a cycle: removing more and more unused stuff.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Oct 20, 2025
Certain(chalk_ir::Canonical<chalk_ir::ConstrainedSubst<Interner>>),
Uncertain(chalk_ir::Canonical<chalk_ir::Substitution<Interner>>),
Certain,
Uncertain,
Copy link
Member

@ShoyuVanilla ShoyuVanilla Oct 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh, we happened to be not using these(variants' fields) anymore

Copy link
Member

@ShoyuVanilla ShoyuVanilla left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me. Awesome works 🎉
BTW, could you fix this error in our metric CI in the previous PR? (I have no idea why it didn't fail beforehand in build or clippy step 🤔)
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-analyzer/actions/runs/18644210303/job/53148291312

error: eliding a lifetime that's named elsewhere is confusing
   --> crates/hir-ty/src/db.rs:316:82
    |
 28 | #[query_group::query_group]
    | --------------------------- the lifetime is named here
...
316 |     fn variances_of(&self, def: GenericDefId) -> crate::next_solver::VariancesOf<'_>;
    |                                                                                  ^^ the same lifetime is elided here
    |
    = help: the same lifetime is referred to in inconsistent ways, making the signature confusing
    = note: `-D mismatched-lifetime-syntaxes` implied by `-D warnings`
    = help: to override `-D warnings` add `#[allow(mismatched_lifetime_syntaxes)]`
help: consistently use `'db`
    |
316 -     fn variances_of(&self, def: GenericDefId) -> crate::next_solver::VariancesOf<'_>;
316 +     fn variances_of(&self, def: GenericDefId) -> crate::next_solver::VariancesOf<'db>;
    |

@ChayimFriedman2
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have no idea why it didn't fail beforehand in build or clippy step 🤔

Maybe we run a different Rust version in them?

@ShoyuVanilla
Copy link
Member

That sounds plausible

@Veykril
Copy link
Member

Veykril commented Oct 20, 2025

Awesome work

@Veykril
Copy link
Member

Veykril commented Oct 20, 2025

And yes thats a fairly new lint so not surprising we are hitting this now

@ChayimFriedman2
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm merging this and will take care of the metrics later.

@ChayimFriedman2 ChayimFriedman2 added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 20, 2025
Merged via the queue into rust-lang:master with commit 3099a7f Oct 20, 2025
15 checks passed
@ChayimFriedman2 ChayimFriedman2 deleted the to-ns2 branch October 20, 2025 15:49
@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Oct 20, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants