refactor and cleanup the leak check, add it to new solver
ended up being a bit more involved than I wanted but is hopefully still easy enough to review as a single PR, can split it into separate ones otherwise.
this can be reviewed commit by commit:
a473d55cdb9284aa2b01282d1b529a2a4d26547b 31a686646534ca006d906ec757ece4e771d6f973 949039c107852a5e36361c08b62821a0613656f5 242917bf5170d9a723c6c8e23e9d9d0c2fa8dc9d ed2b25a7aa28be3184be9e3022c2796a30eaad87 are all pretty straightforward.
03dd83b4c3f4ff27558f5c8ab859bd9f83db1d04 makes it easier to refactor coherence in a later commit, see the commit description, cc `@oli-obk`
4fe311d807a77b6270f384e41689bf5d58f46aec I don't quite remember what we wanted to test here, this definitely doesn't test that the occurs check doesn't cause incorrect errors in coherence, also cc `@oli-obk` here. I may end up writing a new test for this myself later.
5c200d88a91b75bd0875b973150655bd581ef97a is the main refactor of the leak check, changing it to take the `outer_universe` instead of getting it from a snapshot. Using a snapshot requires us to be in a probe which we aren't in the new solver, it also just feels dirty as snapshots don't really have anything to do with universes.
with all of this cfc230d54188d9c7ed867a9a0d1f51be77b485f9 is now kind of trivial.
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Currently a `{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage` can be created from any type that
impls `Into<String>`. That includes `&str`, `String`, and `Cow<'static,
str>`, which are reasonable. It also includes `&String`, which is pretty
weird, and results in many places making unnecessary allocations for
patterns like this:
```
self.fatal(&format!(...))
```
This creates a string with `format!`, takes a reference, passes the
reference to `fatal`, which does an `into()`, which clones the
reference, doing a second allocation. Two allocations for a single
string, bleh.
This commit changes the `From` impls so that you can only create a
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage` from `&str`, `String`, or `Cow<'static,
str>`. This requires changing all the places that currently create one
from a `&String`. Most of these are of the `&format!(...)` form
described above; each one removes an unnecessary static `&`, plus an
allocation when executed. There are also a few places where the existing
use of `&String` was more reasonable; these now just use `clone()` at
the call site.
As well as making the code nicer and more efficient, this is a step
towards possibly using `Cow<'static, str>` in
`{D,Subd}iagnosticMessage::{Str,Eager}`. That would require changing
the `From<&'a str>` impls to `From<&'static str>`, which is doable, but
I'm not yet sure if it's worthwhile.
Use new solver in `evaluate_obligation` query (when new solver is enabled)
(only when `-Ztrait-solver=next`, of course)
... Does this make sense? It seems to me like it should be reasonable, but maybe there's some reason why this is a bad idea.
r? ``@lcnr``
Needs a perf run because I guess this `solver == TraitSolver::Next` check is on a hot path.
Switching them to `Break(())` and `Continue(())` instead.
libs-api would like to remove these constants, so stop using them in compiler to make the removal PR later smaller.
