Record the correct target type when coercing fn items/closures to pointers by compiler-errors · Pull Request #129059 · rust-lang/rust
compiler-errors
changed the title
Record the correct target type when coercing fn items to pointers
Record the correct target type when coercing fn items/closures to pointers
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
and removed S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.labels
Aug 14, 2024matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 14, 2024…type, r=lcnr Record the correct target type when coercing fn items/closures to pointers Self-explanatory. We were previously not recording the *target* type of a coercion as the output of an adjustment. This should remedy that. We must also modify the function pointer casts in MIR typeck to use subtyping, since those broke since rust-lang#118247. r? lcnr
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 14, 2024…iaskrgr Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#128828 (`-Znext-solver` caching) - rust-lang#128954 (Explicitly specify type parameter on FromResidual for Option and ControlFlow.) - rust-lang#129054 (Subtree update of `rust-analyzer`) - rust-lang#129059 (Record the correct target type when coercing fn items/closures to pointers) - rust-lang#129071 (Port `run-make/sysroot-crates-are-unstable` to rmake) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 14, 2024Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#128570 (Stabilize `asm_const`) - rust-lang#128828 (`-Znext-solver` caching) - rust-lang#128954 (Explicitly specify type parameter on FromResidual for Option and ControlFlow.) - rust-lang#129059 (Record the correct target type when coercing fn items/closures to pointers) - rust-lang#129071 (Port `run-make/sysroot-crates-are-unstable` to rmake) - rust-lang#129088 (Make the rendered html doc for rustc better) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 14, 2024Rollup merge of rust-lang#129059 - compiler-errors:subtyping-correct-type, r=lcnr Record the correct target type when coercing fn items/closures to pointers Self-explanatory. We were previously not recording the *target* type of a coercion as the output of an adjustment. This should remedy that. We must also modify the function pointer casts in MIR typeck to use subtyping, since those broke since rust-lang#118247. r? lcnr
This was referenced
Aug 20, 2024bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 25, 2024…g, r=<try> Use equality when relating formal and expected type in arg checking rust-lang#129059 uncovered an interesting issue in argument checking. When we check arguments, we create three sets of types: * Formals * Expected * Actuals The **actuals** are the types of the argument expressions themselves. The **formals** are the types from the signature that we're checking. The **expected** types are the formal types, but passed through `expected_inputs_for_expected_outputs`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/_impl.rs#L691-L725 This method attempts to constrain the formal inputs by relating the [expectation](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_hir_typeck/expectation/enum.Expectation.html) of the call expression and the formal output. When we check an argument, we get the expression's actual type, and then we first attempt to coerce it to the expected type: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/checks.rs#L280-L293 Then we subtype the expected type and the formal type: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/checks.rs#L299-L305 However, since we are now recording the right coercion target (since rust-lang#129059), we now end up recording the expected type to the typeck results, rather than the actual. Since that expected type was [fudged](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_infer/infer/struct.InferCtxt.html#method.fudge_inference_if_ok), it has fresh variables. And since the expected type is only subtyped against the formal type, if that expected type has a bivariant parameter, it will likely remain unconstrained since `Covariant * Bivariant = Bivariant` according to [xform](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/enum.Variance.html#method.xform). This leads to an unconstrained type variable in writeback. AFAICT, there's no reason for us to be using subtyping here, though. The expected output is already related to the expectation by subtyping: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/_impl.rs#L713 So the formals don't need "another" indirection of subtyping in the argument checking... So I've changed it to use equality here. We could alternatively fix this by requiring WF for all the expected types to constrain their bivariant parameters, but this seems a bit overkill. Fixes rust-lang#129286
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 25, 2024…g, r=<try> Use equality when relating formal and expected type in arg checking rust-lang#129059 uncovered an interesting issue in argument checking. When we check arguments, we create three sets of types: * Formals * Expected * Actuals The **actuals** are the types of the argument expressions themselves. The **formals** are the types from the signature that we're checking. The **expected** types are the formal types, but passed through `expected_inputs_for_expected_outputs`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/_impl.rs#L691-L725 This method attempts to constrain the formal inputs by relating the [expectation](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_hir_typeck/expectation/enum.Expectation.html) of the call expression and the formal output. When we check an argument, we get the expression's actual type, and then we first attempt to coerce it to the expected type: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/checks.rs#L280-L293 Then we subtype the expected type and the formal type: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/checks.rs#L299-L305 However, since we are now recording the right coercion target (since rust-lang#129059), we now end up recording the expected type to the typeck results, rather than the actual. Since that expected type was [fudged](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_infer/infer/struct.InferCtxt.html#method.fudge_inference_if_ok), it has fresh variables. And since the expected type is only subtyped against the formal type, if that expected type has a bivariant parameter, it will likely remain unconstrained since `Covariant * Bivariant = Bivariant` according to [xform](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/enum.Variance.html#method.xform). This leads to an unconstrained type variable in writeback. AFAICT, there's no reason for us to be using subtyping here, though. The expected output is already related to the expectation by subtyping: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/_impl.rs#L713 So the formals don't need "another" indirection of subtyping in the argument checking... So I've changed it to use equality here. We could alternatively fix this by requiring WF for all the expected types to constrain their bivariant parameters, but this seems a bit overkill. Fixes rust-lang#129286
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 25, 2024…, r=lcnr Use subtyping for `UnsafeFnPointer` coercion, too I overlooked this in rust-lang#129059, which changed MIR typechecking to use subtyping for other fn pointer coercions. Fixes rust-lang#129285
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 25, 2024…, r=lcnr Use subtyping for `UnsafeFnPointer` coercion, too I overlooked this in rust-lang#129059, which changed MIR typechecking to use subtyping for other fn pointer coercions. Fixes rust-lang#129285
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request
Aug 26, 2024Rollup merge of rust-lang#129288 - compiler-errors:unsafe-fn-coercion, r=lcnr Use subtyping for `UnsafeFnPointer` coercion, too I overlooked this in rust-lang#129059, which changed MIR typechecking to use subtyping for other fn pointer coercions. Fixes rust-lang#129285
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request
Sep 2, 2024…g, r=lcnr Use equality when relating formal and expected type in arg checking rust-lang#129059 uncovered an interesting issue in argument checking. When we check arguments, we create three sets of types: * Formals * Expected * Actuals The **actuals** are the types of the argument expressions themselves. The **formals** are the types from the signature that we're checking. The **expected** types are the formal types, but passed through `expected_inputs_for_expected_outputs`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/_impl.rs#L691-L725 This method attempts to constrain the formal inputs by relating the [expectation](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_hir_typeck/expectation/enum.Expectation.html) of the call expression and the formal output. When we check an argument, we get the expression's actual type, and then we first attempt to coerce it to the expected type: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/checks.rs#L280-L293 Then we subtype the expected type and the formal type: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/checks.rs#L299-L305 However, since we are now recording the right coercion target (since rust-lang#129059), we now end up recording the expected type to the typeck results, rather than the actual. Since that expected type was [fudged](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_infer/infer/struct.InferCtxt.html#method.fudge_inference_if_ok), it has fresh variables. And since the expected type is only subtyped against the formal type, if that expected type has a bivariant parameter, it will likely remain unconstrained since `Covariant * Bivariant = Bivariant` according to [xform](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/enum.Variance.html#method.xform). This leads to an unconstrained type variable in writeback. AFAICT, there's no reason for us to be using subtyping here, though. The expected output is already related to the expectation by subtyping: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/_impl.rs#L713 So the formals don't need "another" indirection of subtyping in the argument checking... So I've changed it to use equality here. We could alternatively fix this by requiring WF for all the expected types to constrain their bivariant parameters, but this seems a bit overkill. Fixes rust-lang#129286
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request
Sep 2, 2024…g, r=lcnr Use equality when relating formal and expected type in arg checking rust-lang#129059 uncovered an interesting issue in argument checking. When we check arguments, we create three sets of types: * Formals * Expected * Actuals The **actuals** are the types of the argument expressions themselves. The **formals** are the types from the signature that we're checking. The **expected** types are the formal types, but passed through `expected_inputs_for_expected_outputs`: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/_impl.rs#L691-L725 This method attempts to constrain the formal inputs by relating the [expectation](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_hir_typeck/expectation/enum.Expectation.html) of the call expression and the formal output. When we check an argument, we get the expression's actual type, and then we first attempt to coerce it to the expected type: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/checks.rs#L280-L293 Then we subtype the expected type and the formal type: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/checks.rs#L299-L305 However, since we are now recording the right coercion target (since rust-lang#129059), we now end up recording the expected type to the typeck results, rather than the actual. Since that expected type was [fudged](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_infer/infer/struct.InferCtxt.html#method.fudge_inference_if_ok), it has fresh variables. And since the expected type is only subtyped against the formal type, if that expected type has a bivariant parameter, it will likely remain unconstrained since `Covariant * Bivariant = Bivariant` according to [xform](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_middle/ty/enum.Variance.html#method.xform). This leads to an unconstrained type variable in writeback. AFAICT, there's no reason for us to be using subtyping here, though. The expected output is already related to the expectation by subtyping: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/a971212545766fdfe0dd68e5d968133f79944a19/compiler/rustc_hir_typeck/src/fn_ctxt/_impl.rs#L713 So the formals don't need "another" indirection of subtyping in the argument checking... So I've changed it to use equality here. We could alternatively fix this by requiring WF for all the expected types to constrain their bivariant parameters, but this seems a bit overkill. Fixes rust-lang#129286
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters