-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Error message in async fn refers to lifetime '1
without defining it
#74072
Comments
This note
Is the one that is supposed to define |
Discussed in @rust-lang/wg-async-foundations. We think rewording the message to something like "let's call the return type of the async function |
In particular, we would really like to cite the function parameter, not the return type, which is kind of random. But I guess I'd have to dig into the code to figure out how we can make that association. |
@rustbot claim I've got as far as
I think I can make further improvements. |
…r=estebank Refactor `region_name`: add `RegionNameHighlight` This PR does not change any diagnostics itself, rather it enables further code changes, but I would like to get approval for the refactoring first before making use of it. In `rustc_mir::borrow_check::diagnostics::region_name`, there is code that allows for, when giving a synthesized name like `'1` to an anonymous lifetime, pointing at e.g. the exact '`&`' that introduces the lifetime. This PR decouples that code from the specific case of arguments, adding a new enum `RegionNameHighlight`, enabling future changes to use it in other places. This allows: * We could change the other `AnonRegionFrom*` variants to use `RegionNameHighlight` to precisely point at where lifetimes are introduced in other locations when they have type annotations, e.g. a closure return `|...| -> &i32`. * Because of how async functions are lowered this affects async functions as well, see rust-lang#74072 * for rust-lang#74597, we could add a second, optional `RegionNameHighlight` to the `AnonRegionFromArgument` variant that highlights a lifetime in the return type of a function when, due to elision, this is the same as the argument lifetime. * in rust-lang#74497 (comment) I noticed that a diagnostic was trying to introduce a lifetime `'2` in the opaque type `impl std::future::Future`. The code for the case of arguments has [code to handle cases like this](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/bbebe7351fcd29af1eb9a35e315369b15887ea09/src/librustc_mir/borrow_check/diagnostics/region_name.rs#L365) but not the others. This refactoring would allow the same code path to handle this. * It might be appropriate to add another variant of `RegionNameHighlight` to say something like `lifetime '1 appears in the opaque type impl std::future::Future`. These are quite a few changes so I thought I would make sure the refactoring is OK before I start making changes that rely on it. :)
…r=estebank Refactor `region_name`: add `RegionNameHighlight` This PR does not change any diagnostics itself, rather it enables further code changes, but I would like to get approval for the refactoring first before making use of it. In `rustc_mir::borrow_check::diagnostics::region_name`, there is code that allows for, when giving a synthesized name like `'1` to an anonymous lifetime, pointing at e.g. the exact '`&`' that introduces the lifetime. This PR decouples that code from the specific case of arguments, adding a new enum `RegionNameHighlight`, enabling future changes to use it in other places. This allows: * We could change the other `AnonRegionFrom*` variants to use `RegionNameHighlight` to precisely point at where lifetimes are introduced in other locations when they have type annotations, e.g. a closure return `|...| -> &i32`. * Because of how async functions are lowered this affects async functions as well, see rust-lang#74072 * for rust-lang#74597, we could add a second, optional `RegionNameHighlight` to the `AnonRegionFromArgument` variant that highlights a lifetime in the return type of a function when, due to elision, this is the same as the argument lifetime. * in rust-lang#74497 (comment) I noticed that a diagnostic was trying to introduce a lifetime `'2` in the opaque type `impl std::future::Future`. The code for the case of arguments has [code to handle cases like this](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/bbebe7351fcd29af1eb9a35e315369b15887ea09/src/librustc_mir/borrow_check/diagnostics/region_name.rs#L365) but not the others. This refactoring would allow the same code path to handle this. * It might be appropriate to add another variant of `RegionNameHighlight` to say something like `lifetime '1 appears in the opaque type impl std::future::Future`. These are quite a few changes so I thought I would make sure the refactoring is OK before I start making changes that rely on it. :)
@SNCPlay42 are you interested in following up on #74072 (comment)? I don't see a linked PR with those changes, but even if they're not perfect it would be great to have something :) |
@jyn514 sorry for the wait! PR is up |
…mulacrum Improve lifetime name annotations for closures & async functions * Don't refer to async functions as "generators" in error output * Where possible, emit annotations pointing exactly at the `&` in the return type of closures (when they have explicit return types) and async functions, like we do for arguments. Addresses rust-lang#74072, but I wouldn't call that *closed* until annotations are identical for async and non-async functions. * Emit a better annotation when the lifetime doesn't appear in the full name type, which currently happens for opaque types like `impl Future`. Addresses rust-lang#74497, but further improves could probably be made (why *doesn't* it appear in the type as `impl Future + '1`?) This is included in the same PR because the changes to `give_name_if_anonymous_region_appears_in_output` would introduce ICE otherwise (it would return `None` in cases where it didn't previously, which then gets `unwrap`ped)
@SNCPlay42 Should this be closed or is there more work to do? For now, @rustbot release-assignment Feel free to claim again if you plan to do more work on this. |
It looks like #78164 will fix this completely. There's still room for improvement around closures (they still highlight the closing brace of the block, and it would be nice to use consistent "let's call this..." language in all cases) but these might be appropriate for separate issues (they also aren't specific to async closures). |
Triage: looks fixed (probably by #78164). Output on nightly today:
|
Output on 1.46.0-nightly (2020-07-04 0cd7ff7) (Playground)
Without
async
, a note like this is emitted, and should also be emitted withasync
:Output on stable 1.44.1 (with async) is different:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: