normalize in `trait_ref_is_knowable` in new solver
fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/trait-system-refactor-initiative/issues/51
Alternatively we could avoid normalizing the self type and do this at the end of the `assemble_candidates_via_self_ty` stack by splitting candidates into:
- applicable without normalizing self type
- applicable for aliases, even if they can be normalized
- applicable for stuff which cannot get normalized further
I don't think this would have any significant benefits and it also seems non-trivial to avoid normalizing only the self type in `trait_ref_is_knowable`.
r? `@compiler-errors`
Rework upcasting confirmation to support upcasting to fewer projections in target bounds
This PR implements a modified trait upcasting algorithm that is resilient to changes in the number of associated types in the bounds of the source and target trait objects.
It does this by equating each bound of the target trait ref individually against the bounds of the source trait ref, rather than doing them all together by constructing a new trait object.
#### The new way we do trait upcasting confirmation
1. Equate the target trait object's principal trait ref with one of the supertraits of the source trait object's principal.
fdcab310b2/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/mod.rs (L2509-L2525)
2. Make sure that every auto trait in the *target* trait object is present in the source trait ref's bounds.
fdcab310b2/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/mod.rs (L2559-L2562)
3. For each projection in the *target* trait object, make sure there is exactly one projection that equates with it in the source trait ref's bound. If there is more than one, bail with ambiguity.
fdcab310b2/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/mod.rs (L2526-L2557)
* Since there may be more than one that applies, we probe first to check that there is exactly one, then we equate it outside of a probe once we know that it's unique.
4. Make sure the lifetime of the source trait object outlives the lifetime of the target.
<details>
<summary>Meanwhile, this is how we used to do upcasting:</summary>
1. For each supertrait of the source trait object, take that supertrait, append the source object's projection bounds, and the *target* trait object's auto trait bounds, and make this into a new object type:
d12c6e947c/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/confirmation.rs (L915-L929)
2. Then equate it with the target trait object:
d12c6e947c/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/confirmation.rs (L936)
This will be a type mismatch if the target trait object has fewer projection bounds, since we compare the bounds structurally in relate:
d12c6e947c/compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/relate.rs (L696-L698)
</details>
Fixes#114035
Also fixes#114113, because I added a normalize call in the old solver.
r? types
THis significantly complicates `NaiveLayout` logic, but is necessary to
ensure that bounds like `NonNull<T>: PointerLike` hold in generic
contexts.
Also implement exact layout computation for structs.
Move `ty::ConstKind` to `rustc_type_ir`
Needed this in another PR for custom debug impls, and this will also be required to move the new solver into a separate crate that does not use `TyCtxt` so that r-a and friends can depend on the trait solver.
Rebased on top of #113325, only the second and third commits needs reviewing
Add some extra information to opaque type cycle errors
Plus a bunch of cleanups.
This should help users debug query cycles due to auto trait checking. We'll probably want to fix cycle errors in most (or all?) cases by looking at the current item's hidden types (new solver does this), and by delaying the auto trait checks to after typeck.
