Emit alias-eq when equating numeric var and projection
This doesn't fix everything having to do with projections and infer vars, but it does fix a common case I saw in HIR typeck.
r? `@lcnr`
Rollup of 9 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #108879 (Unconstrained terms should account for infer vars being equated)
- #108936 (Rustdoc: don't hide anonymous reexport)
- #108940 (Add myself to compiler reviewers list)
- #108945 (Make some report and emit errors take DefIds instead of BodyIds)
- #108946 (Document the resulting values produced when using `From<bool>` on floats)
- #108956 (Make ptr::from_ref and ptr::from_mut in #106116 const.)
- #108960 (Remove `body_def_id` from `Inherited`)
- #108963 (only call git on git checkouts during bootstrap)
- #108964 (Fix the docs for pointer method with_metadata_of)
Failed merges:
- #108950 (Directly construct Inherited in typeck.)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Introduce a no-op `PlaceMention` statement for `let _ =`.
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/54003
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/80059
Split from https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/101500
This PR introduces a new `PlaceMention` statement dedicated to matches that neither introduce bindings nor ascribe types. Without this, all traces of the match would vanish from MIR, making it impossible to diagnose unsafety or use in #101500.
This allows to mark `let _ = <unsafe union access or dereference>` as requiring an unsafe block.
Nominating for lang team, as this introduces an extra error.
Remove `body_def_id` from `Inherited`
We can just use the body id from the obligation cause.
Follow-up to #108945, only my commit is relevant.
r? `@cjgillot` cc `@spastorino`
Unconstrained terms should account for infer vars being equated
Follow-up from the canonicalization PR, wanted to break this one out so I can approve the other PR.
r? `@lcnr`
This is fixed by simply using the currently registered target in the
current session. We need to use it because of target json that are not
by design included in the rustc list of targets.
feat/refactor: improve errors in case of ident with number at start
Improve parser code when we parse a integer (or float) literal but expect an identifier. We emit an error message saying that identifiers can't begin with numbers. This PR just improves that code and expands it to all identifiers. Note that I haven't implemented error recovery (this didn't exist before anyway), I might do that in a follow up PR.
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #108754 (Retry `pred_known_to_hold_modulo_regions` with fulfillment if ambiguous)
- #108759 (1.41.1 supported 32-bit Apple targets)
- #108839 (Canonicalize root var when making response from new solver)
- #108856 (Remove DropAndReplace terminator)
- #108882 (Tweak E0740)
- #108898 (Set `LIBC_CHECK_CFG=1` when building Rust code in bootstrap)
- #108911 (Improve rustdoc-gui/tester.js code a bit)
- #108916 (Remove an unused return value in `rustc_hir_typeck`)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Do not consider `&mut *x` as mutating `x` in `CopyProp`
This PR removes an unfortunate overly cautious case from the current implementation.
Found by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/105274 cc `@saethlin`
Canonicalize root var when making response from new solver
During trait solving, if we equate two inference variables `?0` and `?1` but don't equate them with any rigid types, then `InferCtxt::probe_ty_var` will return `Err` for both of these. The canonicalizer code will then canonicalize the variables independently(!), and the response will not reflect the fact that these two variables have been made equal.
This hinders inference and I also don't think it's sound? I haven't thought too much about it past that, so let's talk about it.
r? ``@lcnr``
Retry `pred_known_to_hold_modulo_regions` with fulfillment if ambiguous
Fixes#108721
The problem here is that when we're checking `is_sized_raw` during codegen on some type that has a lot of opaques in it, something emits several nested obligations that are individually ambiguous, but when processed together in a loop then apply modulo regions. Since the `evaluate_predicates_recursively` inner loop doesn't process predicates until they stop changing, we return `EvaluatedToAmbig`, which makes the sized check return false incorrectly. See:
f15f0ea739/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/traits/select/mod.rs (L596-L606)
... Compared to the analogous loop in the new solver:
f15f0ea739/compiler/rustc_trait_selection/src/solve/mod.rs (L481-L512)
To fix this, if we get ambiguous during `pred_known_to_hold_modulo_regions`, just retry the obligation in a fulfillment context.
--
Unfortunately... I don't have a test for this. I've only tested this locally. Pending minimization :/
r? types
Rename `MapInPlace` as `FlatMapInPlace`.
After removing the `map_in_place` method, which isn't much use because modifying every element in a collection such as a `Vec` can be done trivially with iteration.
r? ``@lqd``
