rust/tests/ui/parser/trait-object-bad-parens.stderr

error[E0178]: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`
  --> $DIR/trait-object-bad-parens.rs:8:16
   |
LL |     let _: Box<((Auto)) + Auto>;
   |                ^^^^^^^^ expected a path

error[E0178]: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`
  --> $DIR/trait-object-bad-parens.rs:9:16
   |
LL |     let _: Box<(Auto + Auto) + Auto>;
   |                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected a path

error[E0178]: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`
  --> $DIR/trait-object-bad-parens.rs:10:16
   |
LL |     let _: Box<(Auto +) + Auto>;
   |                ^^^^^^^^ expected a path

error[E0178]: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`
  --> $DIR/trait-object-bad-parens.rs:11:16
   |
LL |     let _: Box<(dyn Auto) + Auto>;
   |                ^^^^^^^^^^ expected a path

error: aborting due to 4 previous errors

For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0178`.
Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type) Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/ERROR/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`). 2025-04-15 07:44:24 +02:00			error[E0178]: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`
introduce `negative_impls` feature gate and document They used to be covered by `optin_builtin_traits` but negative impls are now applicable to all traits, not just auto traits. This also adds docs in the unstable book for the current state of auto traits. 2020-01-09 05:56:38 -05:00			`--> $DIR/trait-object-bad-parens.rs:8:16`
Move parse-fail tests to UI 2018-10-20 23:36:17 +03:00			`\|`
tests: Do not use `-Z parse-only`, continue compilation to test recovery 2019-01-06 18:33:05 +03:00			`LL \| let _: Box<((Auto)) + Auto>;`
Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type) Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/ERROR/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`). 2025-04-15 07:44:24 +02:00			`\| ^^^^^^^^ expected a path`
Move parse-fail tests to UI 2018-10-20 23:36:17 +03:00
Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type) Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/ERROR/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`). 2025-04-15 07:44:24 +02:00			error[E0178]: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`
			`--> $DIR/trait-object-bad-parens.rs:9:16`
Move parse-fail tests to UI 2018-10-20 23:36:17 +03:00			`\|`
tests: Do not use `-Z parse-only`, continue compilation to test recovery 2019-01-06 18:33:05 +03:00			`LL \| let _: Box<(Auto + Auto) + Auto>;`
Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type) Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/ERROR/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`). 2025-04-15 07:44:24 +02:00			`\| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected a path`
Move parse-fail tests to UI 2018-10-20 23:36:17 +03:00
Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type) Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/ERROR/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`). 2025-04-15 07:44:24 +02:00			error[E0178]: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`
			`--> $DIR/trait-object-bad-parens.rs:10:16`
Move parse-fail tests to UI 2018-10-20 23:36:17 +03:00			`\|`
tests: Do not use `-Z parse-only`, continue compilation to test recovery 2019-01-06 18:33:05 +03:00			`LL \| let _: Box<(Auto +) + Auto>;`
Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type) Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/ERROR/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`). 2025-04-15 07:44:24 +02:00			`\| ^^^^^^^^ expected a path`
Move parse-fail tests to UI 2018-10-20 23:36:17 +03:00
Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type) Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/ERROR/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`). 2025-04-15 07:44:24 +02:00			error[E0178]: expected a path on the left-hand side of `+`
			`--> $DIR/trait-object-bad-parens.rs:11:16`
Move parse-fail tests to UI 2018-10-20 23:36:17 +03:00			`\|`
tests: Do not use `-Z parse-only`, continue compilation to test recovery 2019-01-06 18:33:05 +03:00			`LL \| let _: Box<(dyn Auto) + Auto>;`
Improve diagnostic for E0178 (bad `+` in type) Namely, use a more sensical primary span. Don't pretty-print AST nodes for the diagnostic message. Why: * It's lossy (e.g., it doesn't replicate trailing `+`s in trait objects. * It's prone to leak error nodes (printed as `(/ERROR/)`) since the LHS can easily represent recovered code (e.g., `fn(i32?) + T`). 2025-04-15 07:44:24 +02:00			`\| ^^^^^^^^^^ expected a path`
Move parse-fail tests to UI 2018-10-20 23:36:17 +03:00
			`error: aborting due to 4 previous errors`

			For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0178`.