-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.7k
default auto traits: use default supertraits instead of Self: Trait
bounds on associated items
#145879
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
Bryanskiy
wants to merge
2
commits into
rust-lang:master
Choose a base branch
from
Bryanskiy:supertraits-2
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+207
−345
Open
default auto traits: use default supertraits instead of Self: Trait
bounds on associated items
#145879
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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 file contains hidden or 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 file contains hidden or 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 file contains hidden or 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 file contains hidden or 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 file contains hidden or 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
31 changes: 0 additions & 31 deletions
31
tests/ui/traits/default_auto_traits/backward-compatible-lazy-bounds-pass.rs
This file was deleted.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please remove the above FIXME
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Moreover this test is quite a mixed bag, it's unclear what the test intentions are. In #142693 I almost deleted it for that reason but I kept it to track bugs pertaining to
more_maybe_bounds
instead (as can be seen by the top-level FIXME).I don't think we should test "this relaxed bound is not permitted here" in this file, I'd advise you to create a new one whose name is based on
tests/ui/unsized/relaxed-bounds-invalid-places.rs
(obv not insideunsized/
; maybe have both test files intrait-bounds/
actually).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
From my understanding there are 2 checks for relaxed bounds consistency:
validate_relaxed_bound
) to ensure that?Trait
bounds are in a right place.check_and_report_invalid_relaxed_bounds
) to ensure that?
modifier is applied to "right" traits. And this check has to be done regardless of the place and results of the first check.This PR fixes the first check but not the second and therefore FIXME comments in this file are still relevant.
So, your suggestion is to keep these checks in separate files for readability reasons, right? In my opinion it isn't very useful because the invocation of second check implies that the first check has already been invoked. That is, the test that covers the second check also covers the first one.