The Generics now contain one Vec of an enum for the generic parameters,
rather than two separate Vec's for lifetime and type parameters.
Additionally, places that previously used Vec<LifetimeDef> now use
Vec<GenericParam> instead.
nll part 5
Next round of changes from the nll-master branch.
Extensions:
- we now propagate ty-region-outlives constraints out of closures and into their creator when necessary
- we fix a few ICEs that can occur by doing liveness analysis (and the resulting normalization) during type-checking
- we handle the implicit region bound that assumes that each type `T` outlives the fn body
- we handle normalization of inputs/outputs in fn signatures
Not included in this PR (will come next):
- handling `impl Trait`
- tracking causal information
- extended errors
r? @arielb1
The input/output types found in `UniversalRegions` are not normalized.
The old code used to assign them directly into the MIR, which would
lead to errors when there was a projection in a argument or return
type. This also led to some special cases in the `renumber` code.
We now renumber uniformly but then pass the input/output types into
the MIR type-checker, which equates them with the types found in MIR.
This allows us to normalize at the same time.
This allows us to re-use the `normalize` method on `TypeCheck`, which
is important since normalization may create fresh region
variables. This is not an ideal solution, though, since the current
representation of "liveness constraints" (a vector of (region, point)
pairs) is rather inefficient. Could do somewhat better by converting
to indices, but it'd still be less good than the older code. Unclear
how important this is.
Before, we would always have a `Some` ClosureRegionRequirements if we
were inferring values for a closure. Now we only do is it has a
non-empty set of outlives requirements.
It's just not useful. It also makes it hard to have tests that probe
internal state, since the interning number is very sensitive.
Dumping the number in the case of gensym is not ideal but will do for
now.
In particular, if we see a variable is DROP-LIVE, but it is not
MAYBE-INIT, then we can ignore the drop. This leavess attempt to use
more complex refinements of the idea (e.g., for subpaths or subfields)
to future work.
