Commit Graph

2 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
León Orell Valerian Liehr
879f62bb3c Reword diagnostic about relaxing non-Sized bound
* The phrasing "only does something for" made sense back when this
  diagnostic was a (hard) warning. Now however, it's simply a hard
  error and thus completely rules out "doing something".
* The primary message was way too long
* The new wording more closely mirrors the wording we use for applying
  other bound modifiers (like `const` and `async`) to incompatible
  traits.
* "all other traits are not bound by default" is no longer accurate
  under Sized Hierarchy. E.g., traits and assoc tys are (currently)
  bounded by `MetaSized` by default but can't be relaxed using
  `?MetaSized` (instead, you relax it by adding `PointeeSized`).
* I've decided against adding any diagnositic notes or suggestions
  for now like "trait `Trait` can't be relaxed as it's not bound by
  default" which would be incorrect for `MetaSized` and assoc tys
  as mentioned above) or "consider changing `?MetaSized` to
  `PointeeSized`" as the Sized Hierarchy impl is still WIP)
2025-07-18 12:13:30 +02:00
David Wood
86ab2b60cd hir_analysis: add {Meta,Pointee}Sized bounds
Opting-out of `Sized` with `?Sized` is now equivalent to adding a
`MetaSized` bound, and adding a `MetaSized` or `PointeeSized` bound
is equivalent to removing the default `Sized` bound - this commit
implements this change in `rustc_hir_analysis::hir_ty_lowering`.

`MetaSized` is also added as a supertrait of all traits, as this is
necessary to preserve backwards compatibility.

Unfortunately, non-global where clauses being preferred over item bounds
(where `PointeeSized` bounds would be proven) - which can result in
errors when a `PointeeSized` supertrait/bound/predicate is added to some
items. Rather than `PointeeSized` being a bound on everything, it can
be the absence of a bound on everything, as `?Sized` was.
2025-06-16 23:04:33 +00:00