hir_analysis: skip self type of host effect preds in variances_of
Discovered as part of an implementation of rust-lang/rfcs#3729 - w/out this then when introducing const trait bounds: many more interesting tests change with different output, missing errors, new errors, etc related to this but they all depend on feature flags and are much more complex than this test.
r? ``@oli-obk``
trait_sel: resolve vars in host effects
In the standard library, the `Extend` impl for `Iterator` (specialised with `TrustedLen`) has a parameter which is constrained by a projection predicate. This projection predicate provides a value for an inference variable but - if the default bound is `const Sized` instead of `Sized` - host effect evaluation wasn't resolving variables first. Added a test that doesn't depend on a rust-lang/rfcs#3729 implementation.
Adding the extra resolve can the number of errors in some tests when they gain host effect predicates, but this is not unexpected as calls to `resolve_vars_if_possible` can cause more error tainting to happen.
Added to demonstrate change in output in following commit. Many more
interesting tests change with different output, missing errors, new
errors, etc related to this but they all depend on feature flags and
are much more complex than this.
In the standard library, the `Extend` impl for `Iterator` (specialised
with `TrustedLen`) has a parameter which is constrained by a projection
predicate. This projection predicate provides a value for an inference
variable but host effect evaluation wasn't resolving variables first.
Adding the extra resolve can the number of errors in some tests when they
gain host effect predicates, but this is not unexpected as calls to
`resolve_vars_if_possible` can cause more error tainting to happen.
Co-authored-by: Boxy <rust@boxyuwu.dev>
Don't mention `FromResidual` on bad `?`
Unless `try_trait_v2` is enabled, don't mention that `FromResidual` isn't implemented for a specific type when the implicit `From` conversion of a `?` fails. For the end user on stable, `?` might as well be a compiler intrinsic, so we remove that note to avoid further confusion and allowing other parts of the error to be more prominent.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `u8`
--> $DIR/bad-interconversion.rs:4:20
|
LL | fn result_to_result() -> Result<u64, u8> {
| --------------- expected `u8` because of this
LL | Ok(Err(123_i32)?)
| ------------^ the trait `From<i32>` is not implemented for `u8`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<_, i32>`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= help: the following other types implement trait `From<T>`:
`u8` implements `From<Char>`
`u8` implements `From<bool>`
```
Unless `try_trait_v2` is enabled, don't mention that `FromResidual` isn't implemented for a specific type when the implicit `From` conversion of a `?` fails. For the end user on stable, `?` might as well be a compiler intrinsic, so we remove that note to avoid further confusion and allowing other parts of the error to be more prominent.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `u8`
--> $DIR/bad-interconversion.rs:4:20
|
LL | fn result_to_result() -> Result<u64, u8> {
| --------------- expected `u8` because of this
LL | Ok(Err(123_i32)?)
| ------------^ the trait `From<i32>` is not implemented for `u8`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<_, i32>`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= help: the following other types implement trait `From<T>`:
`u8` implements `From<Char>`
`u8` implements `From<bool>`
```
Fix presentation of purely "additive" replacement suggestion parts
#127541 changes replacement suggestions to use the "diff" view always, which I think is really verbose in cases where a replacement snippet is a "superset" of the snippet that is being replaced.
Consider:
```
LL - Self::Baz: Clone,
LL + Self::Baz: Clone, T: std::clone::Clone
```
In this code, we suggest replacing `", "` with `", T: std::clone::Clone"`. This is a consequence of how the snippet is constructed. I believe that since the string that is being replaced is a subset of the replacement string, it's not providing much value to present this as a diff. Users should be able to clearly understand what's being suggested here using the `~` underline view we've been suggesting for some time now.
Given that this affects ~100 tests out of the ~1000 UI tests affected, I expect this to be a pretty meaningful improvement of the fallout of #127541.
---
In the last commit, this PR also "trims" replacement parts so that they are turned into their purely additive subset, if possible. See the diff for what this means.
---
r? estebank
Reject `?Trait` bounds in various places where we unconditionally warned since 1.0
fixes#135730fixes#135809
Also a breaking change, so let's see what crater says.
This has been an unconditional warning since *before* 1.0
```
error[E0610]: `{integer}` is a primitive type and therefore doesn't have fields
--> $DIR/attempted-access-non-fatal.rs:7:15
|
LL | let _ = 2.l;
| ^
|
help: if intended to be a floating point literal, consider adding a `0` after the period and a `f64` suffix
|
LL - let _ = 2.l;
LL + let _ = 2.0f64;
|
```
this commit makes `deref_into_dyn_supertrait` lint allow-by-default,
removes future incompatibility (we finally live in a broken world), and
changes the wording in the documentation.
previously documentation erroneously said that it lints against *usage*
of the deref impl, while it actually (since 104742) lints on the impl
itself (oooops, my oversight, should have updated it 2+ years ago...)
Ensure that we never try to monomorphize the upcasting or vtable calls of impossible dyn types
Check for impossible obligations in the `dyn Trait` type we're trying to compute its the vtable upcasting and method call slots.
r? lcnr
Only highlight unmatchable parameters at the definition site
Followup to #136497
This generally results more focused messages in the same vein as #99635 (see `test/ui/argument-suggestions/complex.rs`). There are still some cases (e.g. `test/ui/argument-suggestions/permuted_arguments.rs`) where it might be worth highlighting the arguments. This is mitigated by the fact that a suggestion with a suggested rearrangement is given.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Report generic mismatches when calling bodyless trait functions
Don't know if there's an open issue for this. Just happened to notice this when working in that area.
The awkward extra spans added to the diagnostics of some tests (e.g. `trait-with-missing-associated-type-restriction`) is consistent with what happens for normal functions. Should probably be removed since that span doesn't seem to note anything useful.
First and third commit are both cleanups removing some unnecessary work. Second commit has the actual fix.
fixes#135124
