Rollup of 4 pull requests #125791
Closed
Rollup of 4 pull requests #125791
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
This is an API that naturally should exist as a combination of byte_offset_from and sub_ptr both existing (they showed up at similar times so this union was never made). Adding these is a logical (and perhaps final) precondition of stabilizing ptr_sub_ptr (rust-lang#95892).
feat(byte_sub_ptr): add ptr::byte_sub_ptr This is an API that naturally should exist as a combination of byte_offset_from and sub_ptr both existing (they showed up at similar times so this union was never made). Adding these is a logical (and perhaps final) precondition of stabilizing ptr_sub_ptr (rust-lang#95892).
…constraint, r=compiler-errors
Rename HIR `TypeBinding` to `AssocItemConstraint` and related cleanup
Rename `hir::TypeBinding` and `ast::AssocConstraint` to `AssocItemConstraint` and update all items and locals using the old terminology.
Motivation: The terminology *type binding* is extremely outdated. "Type bindings" not only include constraints on associated *types* but also on associated *constants* (feature `associated_const_equality`) and on RPITITs of associated *functions* (feature `return_type_notation`). Hence the word *item* in the new name. Furthermore, the word *binding* commonly refers to a mapping from a binder/identifier to a "value" for some definition of "value". Its use in "type binding" made sense when equality constraints (e.g., `AssocTy = Ty`) were the only kind of associated item constraint. Nowadays however, we also have *associated type bounds* (e.g., `AssocTy: Bound`) for which the term *binding* doesn't make sense.
---
Old terminology (HIR, rustdoc):
```
`TypeBinding`: (associated) type binding
├── `Constraint`: associated type bound
└── `Equality`: (associated) equality constraint (?)
├── `Ty`: (associated) type binding
└── `Const`: associated const equality (constraint)
```
Old terminology (AST, abbrev.):
```
`AssocConstraint`
├── `Bound`
└── `Equality`
├── `Ty`
└── `Const`
```
New terminology (AST, HIR, rustdoc):
```
`AssocItemConstraint`: associated item constraint
├── `Bound`: associated type bound
└── `Equality`: associated item equality constraint OR associated item binding (for short)
├── `Ty`: associated type equality constraint OR associated type binding (for short)
└── `Const`: associated const equality constraint OR associated const binding (for short)
```
r? compiler-errors
Align `Term` methods with `GenericArg` methods, add `Term::expect_*` * `Term::ty` -> `Term::as_type`. * `Term::ct` -> `Term::as_const`. * Adds `Term::expect_type` and `Term::expect_const`, and uses them in favor of `.ty().unwrap()`, etc. I could also shorten these to `as_ty` and then do `GenericArg::as_ty` as well, but I do think the `as_` is important to signal that this is a conversion method, and not a getter, like `Const::ty` is. r? types
…r=lcnr Fold item bounds before proving them in `check_type_bounds` in new solver Vaguely confident that this is sufficient to prevent rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative#46 and rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative#62. This is not the "correct" solution, but will probably suffice until coinduction, at which point we implement the right solution (`check_type_bounds` must prove `Assoc<...> alias-eq ConcreteType`, normalizing requires proving item bounds). r? lcnr
rustbot
added
A-rustdoc-json
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=4 |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
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.
Successful merges:
TypeBindingtoAssocItemConstraintand related cleanup #125635 (Rename HIRTypeBindingtoAssocItemConstraintand related cleanup)Termmethods withGenericArgmethods, addTerm::expect_*#125750 (AlignTermmethods withGenericArgmethods, addTerm::expect_*)check_type_boundsin new solver #125786 (Fold item bounds before proving them incheck_type_boundsin new solver)r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup