Skip to content


Irrefutable bindings matching code is broken #3235

bblum opened this Issue · 11 comments

6 participants

fn main() {
    let x = "hello";
    let ref y = x;
    // let y = match x { ref y => y };  // this way works fine
    error!("%?", *y);


rustc: /home/bblum/rust/src/llvm/lib/VMCore/Instructions.cpp:280:
void llvm::CallInst::init(llvm::Value*, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>,
const llvm::Twine&): Assertion `(i >= FTy->getNumParams() ||
FTy->getParamType(i) == Args[i]->getType()) && "Calling a function
with a bad signature!"' failed.
Aborted (core dumped)

Happens with structs, tuples, etc too.


for some reason that is fairly unclear to me, trans/alt has a completely distinct code path for irrefutable patterns. that path should be deleted and they should all use the normal alt path, imo. anyway, that particular path is hard-coded to copy and doesn't know about ref bindings.


I changed the title to my preferred solution.

@catamorphism catamorphism was assigned

Ugh, this has been a pain in the you-know-what. Not going to be ready for 0.5


Also causes this strange behaviour:

fn main() -> () {
    let a = ~(1, 2);

fn test<T,U>(a : &(T, U)) {
    let (ref _x, ref _y) = *a;

Returns error: moving out of dereference of immutable & pointer


fn main() -> () {
    let a = ~(1, 2);

fn test<T,U>(a : &(T, U)) {
    let (_a, _b) = match *a {
        (ref a, ref b) => (a, b)

Is fine.

This was referenced

Nominating for the well-defined milestone.

This makes working with non-copyable tuples laborious, and actually has serious performance implications for destructuring assignment (at least I think that's related to this bug, copies are generated when they shouldn't be). Failing the well-defined milestone, I think this would fit well into the feature-complete milestone.


I don't feel like this fits under anything except production-ready, but I agree with nominating it.


For what it's worth, I don't think that this is necessarily the right fix anymore. But the bug is real.


Update the title to reflect the general bug.

@nikomatsakis nikomatsakis was assigned

Very close to fixing this. I've got a branch that's been slowly progress towards stability.


accepted for backwards-compatible milestone

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.