impl trait error message around 'static is probably confusing

@cramertj

The error message for this example seems potentially confusing:

#![feature(dyn_trait)]
#![feature(conservative_impl_trait)]
#![feature(underscore_lifetimes)]

fn a<T>(items: &[T]) -> Box<impl Iterator> {
    Box::new(items.iter()) //~ ERROR cannot infer an appropriate lifetime
}

fn main() { }

I get:

error[E0621]: explicit lifetime required in the type of `items`
 --> src/main.rs:5:29
  |
5 | fn a<T>(items: &[T]) -> Box<impl Iterator> {
  |         -----               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ lifetime `'static` required
  |         |
  |         consider changing the type of `items` to `&'static [T]`

What's going wrong here is that impl Iterator can only capture lifetimes that it names, and this one doesn't name any lifetimes. It can be fixed by changing to impl Iterator + '_ -- this is probably what we want to suggest? I'm not sure how best to phrase this, suggestions welcome.

cc @cramertj @estebank

I've seen other cases of this too, it'd be great to improve it.

error[E0XXX]: ambiguous lifetime for `impl Iterator`
 --> src/main.rs:5:29
  |
5 | fn a<T>(items: &[T]) -> Box<impl Iterator> {
  |                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ this trait bound implies lifetime `'static`
help: add a lifetime binding to remove the `'static` requirement
  |
5 | fn a<T>(items: &[T]) -> Box<impl Iterator + '_> {
  |                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
help: otherwise, change the type of `items` to `&'static [T]` to satisfy the `'static` requirement
  |
5 | fn a<T>(items: &'static [T]) -> Box<impl Iterator> {
  |                ^^^^^^^^^^^^

@estebank

@estebank

Suggesting both might be good. However, this label is inaccurate:

this trait bound implies lifetime 'static

That trait bound forbids us from capturing the anonymous lifetime, because it is not mentioned anywhere, but it does not imply 'static. For example, we could capture values of type T, which is not known to be static. Obviously we won't be able to express all that subtlety, but maybe we can say something like "impl Trait types can only capture lifetimes that they reference"?

Your suggested text seems great to me for the label, while this is one of the error messages that would benefit greatly from --teach.

This comes up in Futures-heavy code a lot. In such cases the real solution is to use Arc, but users are sent chasing impossible lifetime annotations.

My suggestion is: No matter what, don't say 'static.

Users don't write Box< + 'static> explicitly by themselves. They see it only in the context of &'static str or static FOO: &'static.

When Rust points to a &-argument, and says it has to be 'static, users understand it literally that arg: &'static Foo is the only allowed solution, which leads to despair.

"Temporary references are not allowed here" may be guiding them towards better solutions.

Another case from user forum:

type EvalFn = Fn() -> (u8);                            
fn take_callback(f: &EvalFn) -> u8 {
    1
} 

fn test(arg: Option<&u8>) -> (u8) {
    let closure = || arg.cloned().unwrap();
    take_callback(&closure)
}

The error points that the argument should be 'static rather than the real (quite unobvious) solution of type EvalFn<'a> = Fn() -> (u8) + 'a.

I hit this when implementing inert_derive.

https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=dcbcd6a9d8e7b989ac3f574044557c64

In my case I can't seem to find a way to tell rustc that my impl ToTokens value is 'static.

A separate situation that would need to be handled is the following:

#![feature(dyn_trait)]
#![feature(conservative_impl_trait)]
#![feature(underscore_lifetimes)]

fn a<'a, T>(items: &'a [T]) -> Box<impl Iterator> {
    Box::new(items.iter())
}

fn main() { }

where the suggestion would need to be to add + 'a constraint, but currently outputs the general lifetime error:

error[E0495]: cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for autoref due to conflicting requirements
 --> file.rs:6:20
  |
6 |     Box::new(items.iter())
  |                    ^^^^
  |
note: first, the lifetime cannot outlive the lifetime 'a as defined on the function body at 5:6...
 --> file.rs:5:6
  |
5 | fn a<'a, T>(items: &'a [T]) -> Box<impl Iterator> {
  |      ^^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
 --> file.rs:6:14
  |
6 |     Box::new(items.iter())
  |              ^^^^^
  = note: but, the lifetime must be valid for the static lifetime...
note: ...so that return value is valid for the call
 --> file.rs:5:36
  |
5 | fn a<'a, T>(items: &'a [T]) -> Box<impl Iterator> {
  |                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Rollup merge of rust-lang#58919 - estebank:impl-trait-return-lifetime…

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

impl trait error message around `'static` is probably confusing #48467

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

impl trait error message around 'static is probably confusing #48467

Description

Activity

estebank commented on Feb 23, 2018

nikomatsakis commented on Feb 23, 2018

estebank commented on Feb 23, 2018

kornelski commented on Jan 5, 2019

kornelski commented on Jan 5, 2019

nox commented on Mar 4, 2019

estebank commented on Mar 4, 2019

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions

impl trait error message around `'static` is probably confusing #48467