Allow defining opaques in check_coroutine_obligations
#118161
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 22, 2023
…mpiler-errors Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#118012 (Add support for global allocation in smir) - rust-lang#118013 (Enable Rust to use the EHCont security feature of Windows) - rust-lang#118100 (Enable profiler in dist-powerpc64-linux) - rust-lang#118142 (Tighten up link attributes for llvm-wrapper bindings) - rust-lang#118147 (Fix some unnecessary casts) - rust-lang#118161 (Allow defining opaques in `check_coroutine_obligations`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 22, 2023
Rollup merge of rust-lang#118161 - compiler-errors:coroutine-obligation-opaques, r=lcnr Allow defining opaques in `check_coroutine_obligations` In the new trait solver, when an obligation stalls on an unresolved coroutine witness, we will stash away the *root* obligation, even if the stalled obligation is only a distant descendent of the root obligation, since the new solver is purely recursive. This means that we may need to reprocess alias-relate obligations (and others) which may define opaque types in the new solver. Currently, we use the coroutine's def id as the defining anchor in `check_coroutine_obligations`, which will allow defining no opaque types, resulting in errors like: ``` error[E0271]: type mismatch resolving `{coroutine@<source>:6:5: 6:17} <: impl Clone` --> <source>:6:5 | 6 | / move |_: ()| { 7 | | let () = yield (); 8 | | } | |_____^ types differ ``` So this PR fixes the defining anchor and does the same trick as `check_opaque_well_formed`, where we manually compare opaques that were defined against their hidden types to make sure they weren't defined differently when processing these stalled coroutine obligations. r? `@lcnr` cc `@cjgillot`
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In the new trait solver, when an obligation stalls on an unresolved coroutine witness, we will stash away the root obligation, even if the stalled obligation is only a distant descendent of the root obligation, since the new solver is purely recursive.
This means that we may need to reprocess alias-relate obligations (and others) which may define opaque types in the new solver. Currently, we use the coroutine's def id as the defining anchor in
check_coroutine_obligations, which will allow defining no opaque types, resulting in errors like:So this PR fixes the defining anchor and does the same trick as
check_opaque_well_formed, where we manually compare opaques that were defined against their hidden types to make sure they weren't defined differently when processing these stalled coroutine obligations.r? @lcnr cc @cjgillot