Improve error message for `AsyncFn` trait failure for RPIT
Use a `WellFormedDerived` obligation cause to make sure we can turn an `AsyncFnKindHelper` trait goal into its parent `AsyncFn*` goal, then fix the logic for reporting `AsyncFn*` kind mismatches.
Best reviewed without whitespace.
Fixes#137905
r? oli-obk
Remove `MaybeForgetReturn` suggestion
#115196 implemented a suggestion to add a missing `return` when there is an ambiguity error, when that ambiguity error could be constrained by the return type of the function.
I initially reviewed it and thought it could be useful; however, looking back at that code now, I feel like it's a bit too much of a hack to be worth keeping around in typeck, especially given how rare it's expected to fire in practice. This is especially true because it depends on `StashKey::MaybeForgetReturn`, which is only stashed when we have *Sized* obligation ambiguity errors. Let's remove it for now.
I'd like to note that it's basically impossible to get this suggestion to apply in its current state except for what I'd consider somewhat artificial examples, involving no generic trait bounds. For example, it's not triggered for:
```rust
struct W<T>(T);
fn bar<T: Default>() -> W<T> { todo!() }
fn foo() -> W<i32> {
if true {
bar();
}
W(0)
}
```
Nor is it triggered for:
```
fn foo() -> i32 {
if true {
Default::default();
}
0
}
```
It's basically only triggered iff there's only one ambiguity error on the type, which is `Sized`.
Generally, suggesting something that affects control flow is a pretty dramatic suggestion; therefore, both the accuracy and precision of this diagnostic should be pretty high.
One other, somewhat unrelated observation is that this might be using stashed diagnostics incorrectly (or at least unnecessarily). Stashed diagnostics are used when error detection is fragmented over several major stages of the compiler, like a parse or resolver error which later can be recovered in typeck. However, this one is a bit different since it is fully handled within typeck -- perhaps that suggests that if this were to be reimplemented, it wouldn't need to be so complicated of an implementation.
mgca: Lower all const paths as `ConstArgKind::Path`
When `#![feature(min_generic_const_args)]` is enabled, we now lower all
const paths in generic arg position to `hir::ConstArgKind::Path`. We
then lower assoc const paths to `ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated` since we
can no longer use the anon const expression lowering machinery. In the
process of implementing this, I factored out `hir_ty_lowering` code that
is now shared between lowering assoc types and assoc consts.
This PR also introduces a `#[type_const]` attribute for trait assoc
consts that are allowed as const args. However, we still need to
implement code to check that assoc const definitions satisfy
`#[type_const]` if present (basically is it a const path or a
monomorphic anon const).
r? `@BoxyUwU`
When `#![feature(min_generic_const_args)]` is enabled, we now lower all
const paths in generic arg position to `hir::ConstArgKind::Path`. We
then lower assoc const paths to `ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated` since we
can no longer use the anon const expression lowering machinery. In the
process of implementing this, I factored out `hir_ty_lowering` code that
is now shared between lowering assoc types and assoc consts.
This PR also introduces a `#[type_const]` attribute for trait assoc
consts that are allowed as const args. However, we still need to
implement code to check that assoc const definitions satisfy
`#[type_const]` if present (basically is it a const path or a
monomorphic anon const).
Introduce `feature(generic_const_parameter_types)`
Allows to define const generic parameters whose type depends on other generic parameters, e.g. `Foo<const N: usize, const ARR: [u8; N]>;`
Wasn't going to implement for this for a while until we could implement it with `bad_inference.rs` resolved but apparently the project simd folks would like to be able to use this for some intrinsics and the inference issue isn't really a huge problem there aiui. (cc ``@workingjubilee`` )
Don't suggest constraining unstable associated types
Fixes#137624
This could be made a bit more specific, considering the local crate's stability or nightly status or something, but I think in general we should not be suggesting associated type bounds on unstable associated items.
Make it so that every structured error annotated with `#[derive(Diagnostic)]` that has a field of type `Ty<'_>`, the printing of that value into a `String` will look at the thread-local storage `TyCtxt` in order to shorten to a length appropriate with the terminal width. When this happen, the resulting error will have a note with the file where the full type name was written to.
```
error[E0618]: expected function, found `((..., ..., ..., ...), ..., ..., ...)``
--> long.rs:7:5
|
6 | fn foo(x: D) { //~ `x` has type `(...
| - `x` has type `((..., ..., ..., ...), ..., ..., ...)`
7 | x(); //~ ERROR expected function, found `(...
| ^--
| |
| call expression requires function
|
= note: the full name for the type has been written to 'long.long-type-14182675702747116984.txt'
= note: consider using `--verbose` to print the full type name to the console
```
Use `edition = "2024"` in the compiler (redux)
Most of this is binding mode changes, which I fixed by running `x.py fix`.
Also adds some miscellaneous `unsafe` blocks for new unsafe standard library functions (the setenv ones), and a missing `unsafe extern` block in some enzyme codegen code, and fixes some precise capturing lifetime changes (but only when they led to errors).
cc ``@ehuss`` ``@traviscross``
Prune dead regionck code
We never encounter `ObligationCauseCode`s that correspond to region obligations that originate from "within" a body, since we don't do HIR regionck anymore on bodies. So prune some dead code.
Tweak E0277 when predicate comes indirectly from ?
When a `?` operation requires an `Into` conversion with additional bounds (like having a concrete error but wanting to convert to a trait object), we handle it speficically and provide the same kind of information we give other `?` related errors.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error: `E: std::error::Error` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:7:13
|
LL | fn foo() -> Result<(), Box<dyn std::error::Error>> {
| -------------------------------------- required `E: std::error::Error` because of this
LL | Ok(bar()?)
| -----^ the trait `std::error::Error` is not implemented for `E`
| |
| this has type `Result<_, E>`
|
note: `E` needs to implement `std::error::Error`
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:1:1
|
LL | struct E;
| ^^^^^^^^
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= note: required for `Box<dyn std::error::Error>` to implement `From<E>`
```
Avoid talking about `FromResidual` when other more relevant information is being given, particularly from `rust_on_unimplemented`.
Fix#137238.
-----
CC #137232, which was a smaller step related to this.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error: `E: std::error::Error` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:7:13
|
LL | fn foo() -> Result<(), Box<dyn std::error::Error>> {
| -------------------------------------- required `E: std::error::Error` because of this
LL | Ok(bar()?)
| -----^ the trait `std::error::Error` is not implemented for `E`
| |
| this has type `Result<_, E>`
|
note: `E` needs to implement `std::error::Error`
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:1:1
|
LL | struct E;
| ^^^^^^^^
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= note: required for `Box<dyn std::error::Error>` to implement `From<E>`
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error to `X`
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:18:13
|
LL | fn bat() -> Result<(), X> {
| ------------- expected `X` because of this
LL | Ok(bar()?)
| -----^ the trait `From<E>` is not implemented for `X`
| |
| this can't be annotated with `?` because it has type `Result<_, E>`
|
note: `X` needs to implement `From<E>`
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:4:1
|
LL | struct X;
| ^^^^^^^^
note: alternatively, `E` needs to implement `Into<X>`
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:1:1
|
LL | struct E;
| ^^^^^^^^
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
```
When a `?` operation requires an `Into` conversion with additional bounds (like having a concrete error but wanting to convert to a trait object), we handle it speficically and provide the same kind of information we give other `?` related errors.
```
error[E0277]: `?` couldn't convert the error: `E: std::error::Error` is not satisfied
--> $DIR/bad-question-mark-on-trait-object.rs:5:13
|
LL | fn foo() -> Result<(), Box<dyn std::error::Error>> {
| -------------------------------------- required `E: std::error::Error` because of this
LL | Ok(bar()?)
| ^ the trait `std::error::Error` is not implemented for `E`
|
= note: the question mark operation (`?`) implicitly performs a conversion on the error value using the `From` trait
= note: required for `Box<dyn std::error::Error>` to implement `From<E>`
```
Avoid talking about `FromResidual` when other more relevant information is being given, particularly from `rust_on_unimplemented`.
Register `USAGE_OF_TYPE_IR_INHERENT`, remove inherent usages
I implemented a lint to discourage the usage of `rustc_type_ir::inherent` but never actually enabled it. People started using `rustc_type_ir::inherent` methods through globs, lol.
r? fmease or reassign as you please
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>`
```
Continuing the work started in #136466.
Every method gains a `hir_` prefix, though for the ones that already
have a `par_` or `try_par_` prefix I added the `hir_` after that.
First of all, note that `Map` has three different relevant meanings.
- The `intravisit::Map` trait.
- The `map::Map` struct.
- The `NestedFilter::Map` associated type.
The `intravisit::Map` trait is impl'd twice.
- For `!`, where the methods are all unreachable.
- For `map::Map`, which gets HIR stuff from the `TyCtxt`.
As part of getting rid of `map::Map`, this commit changes `impl
intravisit::Map for map::Map` to `impl intravisit::Map for TyCtxt`. It's
fairly straightforward except various things are renamed, because the
existing names would no longer have made sense.
- `trait intravisit::Map` becomes `trait intravisit::HirTyCtxt`, so named
because it gets some HIR stuff from a `TyCtxt`.
- `NestedFilter::Map` assoc type becomes `NestedFilter::MaybeTyCtxt`,
because it's always `!` or `TyCtxt`.
- `Visitor::nested_visit_map` becomes `Visitor::maybe_tcx`.
I deliberately made the new trait and associated type names different to
avoid the old `type Map: Map` situation, which I found confusing. We now
have `type MaybeTyCtxt: HirTyCtxt`.
The end goal is to eliminate `Map` altogether.
I added a `hir_` prefix to all of them, that seemed simplest. The
exceptions are `module_items` which became `hir_module_free_items` because
there was already a `hir_module_items`, and `items` which became
`hir_free_items` for consistency with `hir_module_free_items`.
In "specify type" suggestion, skip type params that are already known
When we suggest specifying a type for an expression or pattern, like in a `let` binding, we previously would print the entire type as the type system knew it. We now look at the params that have *no* inference variables, so they are fully known to the type system which means that they don't need to be specified.
This helps in suggestions for types that are really long, because we can usually skip most of the type params and make the annotation as short as possible:
```
error[E0282]: type annotations needed for `Result<_, ((..., ..., ..., ...), ..., ..., ...)>`
--> $DIR/really-long-type-in-let-binding-without-sufficient-type-info.rs:7:9
|
LL | let y = Err(x);
| ^ ------ type must be known at this point
|
help: consider giving `y` an explicit type, where the type for type parameter `T` is specified
|
LL | let y: Result<T, _> = Err(x);
| ++++++++++++++
```
Fix#135919.
