The split between walk_pat and maybe_read_scrutinee has now become
redundant.
Due to this change, one testcase within the testsuite has become similar
enough to a known ICE to also break. I am leaving this as future work,
as it requires feature(type_alias_impl_trait)
misc coercion cleanups and handle safety correctly
r? lcnr
### "remove normalize call"
Fixesrust-lang/rust#132765
If the normalization fails we would sometimes get a `TypeError` containing inference variables created inside of the probe used by coercion. These would then get leaked out causing ICEs in diagnostics logic
### "leak check and lub for closure<->closure coerce-lubs of same defids"
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/233
```rust
fn peculiar() -> impl Fn(u8) -> u8 {
return |x| x + 1
}
```
the `|x| x + 1` expr has a type of `Closure(?31t)` which we wind up inferring the RPIT to. The `CoerceMany` `ret_coercion` for the whole `peculiar` typeck has an expected type of `RPIT` (unnormalized). When we type check the `return |x| x + 1` expr we go from the never type to `Closure(?31t)` which then participates in the `ret_coercion` giving us a `coerce-lub(RPIT, Closure(?31t))`.
Normalizing `RPIT` gives us some `Closure(?50t)` where `?31t` and `?50t` have been unified with `?31t` as the root var. `resolve_vars_if_possible` doesn't resolve infer vars to their roots so these wind up with different structural identities so the fast path doesn't apply and we fall back to coercing to a `fn` ptr. cc rust-lang/rust#147193 which also fixes this
New solver probably just gets more inference variables here because canonicalization + generally different approach to normalization of opaques. Idk :3
### FCP worthy stuffy
there are some other FCP worthy things but they're in my FCP comment which also contains some analysis of the breaking nature of the previously listed changes in this PR: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/148602#issuecomment-3503497467
cmse: do not calculate the layout of a type with infer types
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81391
tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/75835
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/130104
Don't calculate the layout of a type with an infer type (`_`). This now emits `LayoutError::Unknown`, causing an error similar to when any other calling convention is used in this location.
The tests use separate functions because only the first such error in a function body is reported.
r? `@davidtwco` (might need some T-types assistance)
mgca: Add ConstArg representation for const items
tracking issue: rust-lang/rust#132980fixesrust-lang/rust#131046fixesrust-lang/rust#134641
As part of implementing `min_generic_const_args`, we need to distinguish const items that can be used in the type system, such as in associated const equality projections, from const items containing arbitrary const code, which must be kept out of the type system. Specifically, all "type consts" must be either concrete (no generics) or generic with a trivial expression like `N` or a path to another type const item.
To syntactically distinguish these cases, we require, for now at least, that users annotate all type consts with the `#[type_const]` attribute. Then, we validate that the const's right-hand side is indeed eligible to be a type const and represent it differently in the HIR.
We accomplish this representation using a new `ConstItemRhs` enum in the HIR, and a similar but simpler enum in the AST. When `#[type_const]` is **not** applied to a const (e.g. on stable), we represent const item right-hand sides (rhs's) as HIR bodies, like before. However, when the attribute is applied, we instead lower to a `hir::ConstArg`. This syntactically distinguishes between trivial const args (paths) and arbitrary expressions, which are represented using `AnonConst`s. Then in `generics_of`, we can take advantage of the existing machinery to bar the `AnonConst` rhs's from using parent generics.
error from const eval lint causes ICE at check_pat in late_lint, because the function expects the typeck result isn't tainted by error but it is.
To avoid the ICE, check_pat returns earlier if the typeck_result is tainted.
check_mod_deathness also has an issue from the same reason. visit_body for making live symbols expects the typeck result has no error.
So this commit adds a check in visit_nested_body to avoid the ICE.
However, if visit_nested_body just returns without doing anything, all codes with the error are marked as dead, because live_symbols is empty.
To avoid this side effect, visit_nested_body and other visit_* functions in MarkSymbolVistior should return appropriate error.
If a function returns ControlFlow::Break, live_symbols_and_ignore_derived_traits returns earlier with error,
then check_mod_deathness, the caller of the function returns earlier without pushing everything into dead_codes.
Fix normalization overflow ICEs in monomorphization
Fixesrust-lang/rust#92004Fixesrust-lang/rust#92470Fixesrust-lang/rust#95134Fixesrust-lang/rust#105275Fixesrust-lang/rust#105937
Fixes rust-lang/rust#117696-2
Fixesrust-lang/rust#118590Fixesrust-lang/rust#122823Fixesrust-lang/rust#131342Fixesrust-lang/rust#139659
## Analysis:
The causes of these issues are similar. They contain generic recursive functions that can be instantiated with different args infinitely at monomorphization stage.
Ideally this should be caught by the [`check_recursion_limit`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/c0bb3b98bb7aac24a37635e5d36d961e0b14f435/compiler/rustc_monomorphize/src/collector.rs#L468) function. The reality is that normalization can reach recursion limit earlier than monomorphization's check because they calculate depths in different ways.
Since normalization is called everywhere, ICEs appear in different locations.
## Fix:
If we abort on overflow with `TypingMode::PostAnalysis` in the trait solver, it would also catch these errors.
The main challenge is providing good diagnostics for them. So it's quite natural to put the check right before these normalization happening.
I first tried to check the whole MIR body's normalization and `references_error`. (As elaborate_drop handles normalization failure by [returning `ty::Error`](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/c0bb3b98bb7aac24a37635e5d36d961e0b14f435/compiler/rustc_mir_transform/src/elaborate_drop.rs#L514-L519).)
It turns out that checking all `Local`s seems sufficient.
These types are gonna be normalized anyway. So with cache, these checks shouldn't be expensive.
This fixes these ICEs for both the next and old solver, though I'm not sure the change I made to the old solver is proper. Its overflow handling looks convoluted thus I didn't try to fix it more "upstream".
Turn ProjectionElem::Subtype into CastKind::Subtype
I noticed that drop elaboration can't, in general, handle `ProjectionElem::SubType`. It creates a disjoint move path that overlaps with other move paths. (`Subslice` does too, and I'm working on a different PR to make that special case less fragile.) If its skipped and treated as the same move path as its parent then `MovePath.place` has multiple possible projections. (It would probably make sense to remove all `Subtype` projections for the canonical place but it doesn't make sense to have this special case for a problem that doesn't actually occur in real MIR.)
The only reason this doesn't break is that `Subtype` is always the sole projection of the local its applied to. For the same reason, it works fine as a `CastKind` so I figured that makes more sense than documenting and validating this hidden invariant.
cc rust-lang/rust#112651, rust-lang/rust#133258
r? Icnr (bc you've been the main person dealing with `Subtype` it looks like)
Fix some crash-test directives
- 120175 fails to crash for non-ELF targets; presumably this wasn't noticed because the CI jobs don't enable rustc assertions for non-ELF hosts.
- 34127, 125722, and 131292 have `only-x86_64`, which is overly specific.
- Unnecessary x86 directives cause friction for contributors using aarch64, especially now that many PR CI jobs also use aarch64.
r? ghost
Simplify polonius location-sensitive analysis
This PR reworks the location-sensitive analysis into what we think is a worthwhile subset of the datalog analysis. A sort of polonius alpha analysis that handles NLL problem case 3 and more, but is still using the faster "reachability as an approximation of liveness", as well as the same loans-in-scope computation as NLLs -- and thus doesn't handle full flow-sensitivity like the datalog implementation.
In the last few months, we've identified this subset as being actionable:
- we believe we can make a stabilizable version of this analysis
- it is an improvement over the status quo
- it can also be modeled in a-mir-formality, or some other formalism, for assurances about soundness, and I believe ````````@nikomatsakis```````` is interested in looking into this during H2.
- and we've identified the areas of work we wish to explore later to gradually expand the supported cases: the differences between reachability and liveness, support of kills, and considerations of time-traveling, for example.
The approach in this PR is to try less to have the graph only represent live paths, by checking whether we reach a live region during traversal and recording the loan as live there, instead of equating traversal with liveness like today because it has subtleties with the typeck edges in statements (that could forward loans to the successor point without ensuring their liveness). We can then also simplify these typeck stmt edges. And we also can simplify traversal by removing looking at kills, because that's enough to handle a bunch of NLL problem 3 cases -- and we can gradually support them more and more in traversal in the future, to reduce the approximation of liveness.
There's still some in-progress pieces of work w/r/t opaque types that I'm expecting [lcnr's opaque types rework](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/139587), and [amanda's SCCs rework](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/130227) to handle. That didn't seem to show up in tests until I rebased today (and shows lack of test coverage once again) when https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/142255 introduced a couple of test failures with the new captures rules from edition 2024. It's not unexpected since we know more work is needed with member constraints (and we're not even using SCCs in this prototype yet)
I'll look into these anyways, both for future work, and checking how these other 2 PRs would change things.
---
I'm not sure the following means a lot until we have some formalism in-place, but:
- I've changed the polonius compare-mode to use this analysis: the tests pass with it, except 2 cases with minor diagnostics differences, and the 2 edition 2024 opaque types one I mentioned above and need to investigate
- things that are expected to work still do work: it bootstraps, can run our rustc-perf benchmarks (and the results are not even that bad), and a crater run didn't find any regressions (forgetting that crater currently fails to test around a quarter of all crates 👼)
- I've added tests with improvements, like the NLL problem case 3 and others, as well as some that behave the same as NLLs today and are thus worse than the datalog implementation
r? ````````@jackh726````````
(no rush I know you're deep in phd work and "implmentating" the new trait solver for r-a :p <3)
This also fixesrust-lang/rust#135646, a diagnostics ICE from the previous implementation.
Maja Kądziołka