Implement some tweaks in the new solver #107786
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
|
r? @lcnr (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred to the core trait solver cc @rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor |
lcnr
reviewed
Feb 8, 2023
compiler-errors
force-pushed
the
new-solver-some-tweaks
branch
from
2b14080
to
caa8ee9
Compare
|
@bors r=lcnr rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
compiler-errors
added a commit
to compiler-errors/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2023
…eaks, r=lcnr Implement some tweaks in the new solver I've been testing the new solver on some small codebases, and these are a few small changes I've needed to make. The most "controversial" here is implementing `trait_candidate_should_be_dropped_in_favor_of`, which I just implemented to always return false. This surprisingly allows some code to compile, without us having to actually decide on any semantics yet. r? `@rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor`
|
@bors r- i'll wait for the other pr to land |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
compiler-errors
force-pushed
the
new-solver-some-tweaks
branch
from
caa8ee9
to
654f43f
Compare
|
@bors r=lcnr |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2023
Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#107648 (unused-lifetimes: don't warn about lifetimes originating from expanded code) - rust-lang#107655 (rustdoc: use the same URL escape rules for fragments as for examples) - rust-lang#107659 (test: snapshot for derive suggestion in diff files) - rust-lang#107786 (Implement some tweaks in the new solver) - rust-lang#107803 (Do not bring trait alias supertraits into scope) - rust-lang#107815 (Disqualify `auto trait` built-in impl in new solver if explicit `impl` exists) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
11 tasks
lcnr
reviewed
Feb 10, 2023
| Ok(self.discard_reservation_impl(candidates.pop().unwrap()).result) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| fn trait_candidate_should_be_dropped_in_favor_of( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not really trait candidates anymore 😁
There was a problem hiding this comment.
crap, though I renamed this one too
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I've been testing the new solver on some small codebases, and these are a few small changes I've needed to make.
The most "controversial" here is implementing
trait_candidate_should_be_dropped_in_favor_of, which I just implemented to always return false. This surprisingly allows some code to compile, without us having to actually decide on any semantics yet.r? @rust-lang/initiative-trait-system-refactor