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
Enable more tests on Windows
As part of the discussion of https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/822 on Zulip, it was mentioned that problems with the i686-pc-windows-gnu target may have resulted in tests being disabled on Windows.
So in this PR, I've ripped out all our `//@ ignore-windows` directives, then re-added all the ones that are definitely required based on the outcome of try-builds, and in some cases I've improved the justification or tightened the directives to `//@ ignore-msvc` or ignoring specific targets.
Rework "long type names" printing logic
Make it so more type-system types can be printed in a shortened version (like `Predicate`s).
Centralize printing the information about the "full type name path".
Make the "long type path" for the file where long types are written part of `Diag`, so that it becomes easier to keep track of it, and ensure it will always will be printed out last in the diagnostic by making its addition to the output implicit.
Tweak the shortening of types in "expected/found" labels.
Remove dead file `note.rs`.
Use proper type when applying deref adjustment in const
When applying a deref adjustment to some type `Wrap<T>` which derefs to `T`, we were checking that `T: ~const Deref`, not `Wrap<T>: ~const Deref` like we should have been.
r? project-const-traits
Fixes#136273Fixes#135210 -- I just deleted the test since the regression test is uninteresting
Manually walk into WF obligations in `BestObligation` proof tree visitor
When we encounter a `WellFormed` obligation in the `BestObligation` proof tree visitor, ignore the proof tree and call `wf::unnormalized_obligations` to derive well-formed obligations with the correct cause codes. This is to avoid having to replicate the somewhat delicate logic that `wf.rs` does to set up its obligation causes... Don't see a better way to do this.
vibes?? r? lcnr
Make it so more type-system types can be printed in a shortened version (like `Predicate`s).
Centralize printing the information about the "full type name path".
Make the "long type path" for the file where long types are written part of `Diag`, so that it becomes easier to keep track of it, and ensure it will always will be printed out last in the diagnostic by making its addition to the output implicit.
Tweak the shortening of types in "expected/found" labels.
Remove dead file `note.rs`.
Compiler: Finalize dyn compatibility renaming
Update the Reference link to use the new URL fragment from https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1666 (this change has finally hit stable). Fixes a FIXME.
Follow-up to #130826.
Part of #130852.
~~Blocking it on #133372.~~ (merged)
r? ghost
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #135414 (Stabilize `const_black_box`)
- #136150 (ci: use windows 2025 for i686-mingw)
- #136258 (rustdoc: rename `issue-\d+.rs` tests to have meaningful names (part 11))
- #136270 (Remove `NamedVarMap`.)
- #136278 (add constraint graph to polonius MIR dump)
- #136287 (LLVM changed the nocapture attribute to captures(none))
- #136291 (some test suite cleanups)
- #136296 (float::min/max: mention the non-determinism around signed 0)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Do not consider child bound assumptions for rigid alias
r? lcnr
See first commit for the important details. For second commit, I also stacked a somewhat opinionated name change, though I can separate that if needed.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/149
Properly report error when object type param default references self
I accidentally broke this error for cases where a type parameter references `Self` via a projection (i.e. `trait Foo<Arg = Self::Bar> {}`). This PR fixes that, and also makes the error a bit easier to understand.
Fixes#135918
handle global trait bounds defining assoc types
This also fixes the compare-mode for
- tests/ui/coherence/coherent-due-to-fulfill.rs
- tests/ui/codegen/mono-impossible-2.rs
- tests/ui/trivial-bounds/trivial-bounds-inconsistent-projection.rs
- tests/ui/nll/issue-61320-normalize.rs
I first considered the alternative to always prefer where-bounds during normalization, regardless of how the trait goal has been proven by changing `fn merge_candidates` instead. ecda83b30f/compiler/rustc_next_trait_solver/src/solve/assembly/mod.rs (L785)
This approach is more restrictive than behavior of the old solver to avoid mismatches between trait and normalization goals. This may be breaking in case the where-bound adds unnecessary region constraints and we currently don't ever try to normalize an associated type. I would like to detect these cases and change the approach to exactly match the old solver if required. I want to minimize cases where attempting to normalize in more places causes code to break.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Don't pick `T: FnPtr` nested goals as the leaf goal in diagnostics for new solver
r? `@lcnr`
See `tests/ui/traits/next-solver/diagnostics/dont-pick-fnptr-bound-as-leaf.rs` for a minimized example of what code this affects the diagnostics off. The output of running nightly `-Znext-solver` on that test is the following:
```
error[E0277]: the trait bound `Foo: Trait` is not satisfied
--> src/lib.rs:14:20
|
14 | requires_trait(Foo);
| -------------- ^^^ the trait `FnPtr` is not implemented for `Foo`
| |
| required by a bound introduced by this call
|
note: required for `Foo` to implement `Trait`
--> src/lib.rs:7:16
|
7 | impl<T: FnPtr> Trait for T {}
| ----- ^^^^^ ^
| |
| unsatisfied trait bound introduced here
note: required by a bound in `requires_trait`
--> src/lib.rs:11:22
|
11 | fn requires_trait<T: Trait>(_: T) {}
| ^^^^^ required by this bound in `requires_trait`
```
Part of rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative#148
Use `structurally_normalize` instead of manual `normalizes-to` goals in alias relate errors
r? `@lcnr`
I added `structurally_normalize_term` so that code that is generic over ty or const can use the structurally normalize helpers. See `tests/ui/traits/next-solver/diagnostics/alias_relate_error_uses_structurally_normalize.rs` for a description of the reason for the (now fixed) ICEs
This CL makes a number of small changes to dyn compatibility errors:
- "object safety" has been renamed to "dyn-compatibility" throughout
- "Convert to enum" suggestions are no longer generated when there
exists a type-generic impl of the trait or an impl for `dyn OtherTrait`
- Several error messages are reorganized for user readability
Additionally, the dyn compatibility error creation code has been
split out into functions.
cc #132713
cc #133267
Rework dyn trait lowering to stop being so intertwined with trait alias expansion
This PR reworks the trait object lowering code to stop handling trait aliases so funky, and removes the `TraitAliasExpander` in favor of a much simpler design. This refactoring is important for making the code that I'm writing in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/133397 understandable and easy to maintain, so the diagnostics regressions are IMO inevitable.
In the old trait object lowering code, we used to be a bit sloppy with the lists of traits in their unexpanded and expanded forms. This PR largely rewrites this logic to expand the trait aliases *once* and handle them more responsibly throughout afterwards.
Please review this with whitespace disabled.
r? lcnr
Use trait definition cycle detection for trait alias definitions, too
fixes#133901
In general doing this for `All` is not right, but this code path is specifically for traits and trait aliases, and there we only ever use `All` for trait aliases.
Prefer lower `TraitUpcasting` candidates in selection
Fixes#135463. The underlying cause is this ambiguity, but it's more clear (and manifests as a coercion error, rather than a MIR validation error) when it's written the way I did in the UI test.
Sorry this is cursed r? lcnr
