Fix expected/found order on impl trait projection mismatch error
fixes#68561
This PR adds a new `ObligationCauseCode` used when checking the concrete type of an impl trait satisfies its bounds, and checks for that cause code in the existing test to see if a projection's normalized type should be the "expected" or "found" type.
The second commit adds a `peel_derives` to that test, which appears to be necessary in some cases (see projection-mismatch-in-impl-where-clause.rs, which would still give expected/found in the wrong order otherwise). This caused some other changes in diagnostics not involving impl trait, but they look correct to me.
const_evaluatable_checked: Stop eagerly erroring in `is_const_evaluatable`
Fixes#82279
We don't want to be emitting errors inside of is_const_evaluatable because we may call this during selection where it should be able to fail silently
There were two errors being emitted in `is_const_evaluatable`. The one causing the compile error in #82279 was inside the match arm for `FailureKind::MentionsParam` but I moved the other error being emitted too since it made things cleaner imo
The `NotConstEvaluatable` enum \*should\* have a fourth variant for when we fail to evaluate a concrete const, e.g. `0 - 1` but that cant happen until #81339
cc `@oli-obk` `@lcnr`
r? `@nikomatsakis`
Rust contains various size checks conditional on target_arch = "x86_64",
but these checks were never intended to apply to
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnux32. Add target_pointer_width = "64" to the
conditions.
Implement RFC 2580: Pointer metadata & VTable
RFC: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2580
~~Before merging this PR:~~
* [x] Wait for the end of the RFC’s [FCP to merge](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/2580#issuecomment-759145278).
* [x] Open a tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/81513
* [x] Update `#[unstable]` attributes in the PR with the tracking issue number
----
This PR extends the language with a new lang item for the `Pointee` trait which is special-cased in trait resolution to implement it for all types. Even in generic contexts, parameters can be assumed to implement it without a corresponding bound.
For this I mostly imitated what the compiler was already doing for the `DiscriminantKind` trait. I’m very unfamiliar with compiler internals, so careful review is appreciated.
This PR also extends the standard library with new unstable APIs in `core::ptr` and `std::ptr`:
```rust
pub trait Pointee {
/// One of `()`, `usize`, or `DynMetadata<dyn SomeTrait>`
type Metadata: Copy + Send + Sync + Ord + Hash + Unpin;
}
pub trait Thin = Pointee<Metadata = ()>;
pub const fn metadata<T: ?Sized>(ptr: *const T) -> <T as Pointee>::Metadata {}
pub const fn from_raw_parts<T: ?Sized>(*const (), <T as Pointee>::Metadata) -> *const T {}
pub const fn from_raw_parts_mut<T: ?Sized>(*mut (),<T as Pointee>::Metadata) -> *mut T {}
impl<T: ?Sized> NonNull<T> {
pub const fn from_raw_parts(NonNull<()>, <T as Pointee>::Metadata) -> NonNull<T> {}
/// Convenience for `(ptr.cast(), metadata(ptr))`
pub const fn to_raw_parts(self) -> (NonNull<()>, <T as Pointee>::Metadata) {}
}
impl<T: ?Sized> *const T {
pub const fn to_raw_parts(self) -> (*const (), <T as Pointee>::Metadata) {}
}
impl<T: ?Sized> *mut T {
pub const fn to_raw_parts(self) -> (*mut (), <T as Pointee>::Metadata) {}
}
/// `<dyn SomeTrait as Pointee>::Metadata == DynMetadata<dyn SomeTrait>`
pub struct DynMetadata<Dyn: ?Sized> {
// Private pointer to vtable
}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> DynMetadata<Dyn> {
pub fn size_of(self) -> usize {}
pub fn align_of(self) -> usize {}
pub fn layout(self) -> crate::alloc::Layout {}
}
unsafe impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Send for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
unsafe impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Sync for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Debug for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Unpin for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Copy for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Clone for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Eq for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> PartialEq for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Ord for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> PartialOrd for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
impl<Dyn: ?Sized> Hash for DynMetadata<Dyn> {}
```
API differences from the RFC, in areas noted as unresolved questions in the RFC:
* Module-level functions instead of associated `from_raw_parts` functions on `*const T` and `*mut T`, following the precedent of `null`, `slice_from_raw_parts`, etc.
* Added `to_raw_parts`
Rename `optin_builtin_traits` to `auto_traits`
They were originally called "opt-in, built-in traits" (OIBITs), but
people realized that the name was too confusing and a mouthful, and so
they were renamed to just "auto traits". The feature flag's name wasn't
updated, though, so that's what this PR does.
There are some other spots in the compiler that still refer to OIBITs,
but I don't think changing those now is worth it since they are internal
and not particularly relevant to this PR.
Also see <https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/opt-in.2C.20built-in.20traits.20(auto.20traits).20feature.20name>.
r? `@oli-obk` (feel free to re-assign if you're not the right reviewer for this)
More structured suggestions for boxed trait objects instead of impl Trait on non-coerceable tail expressions
When encountering a `match` or `if` as a tail expression where the
different arms do not have the same type *and* the return type of that
`fn` is an `impl Trait`, check whether those arms can implement `Trait`
and if so, suggest using boxed trait objects.
Use structured suggestion for `impl T` to `Box<dyn T>`.
Fix https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69107
When encountering a `match` or `if` as a tail expression where the
different arms do not have the same type *and* the return type of that
`fn` is an `impl Trait`, check whether those arms can implement `Trait`
and if so, suggest using boxed trait objects.
