-
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
Initial implementation of unsafe binder types #130514
Draft
compiler-errors
wants to merge
8
commits into
rust-lang:master
Choose a base branch
from
compiler-errors:unsafe-binders
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
+1,126
−79
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
rustbot
added
PG-exploit-mitigations
Project group: Exploit mitigations
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-libs
Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
WG-trait-system-refactor
The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver)
labels
Sep 18, 2024
compiler-errors
changed the title
Initial implementation of unsafe binders
Initial implementation of unsafe binder types
Sep 18, 2024
7 tasks
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #130724) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
compiler-errors
force-pushed
the
unsafe-binders
branch
from
September 23, 2024 17:32
3aa766a
to
ce3fbcb
Compare
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #127117) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
A-rustdoc-json
Area: Rustdoc JSON backend
PG-exploit-mitigations
Project group: Exploit mitigations
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
T-libs
Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
WG-trait-system-refactor
The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver)
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 written up some motivation about unsafe binders here: https://hackmd.io/@compiler-errors/HkXwoBPaR
Specifically, I'd like to provide a coherent way to represent lifetimes in structs which are unnameable and can't be plugged by
'static
. This has been toyed around with in the past, such as'unsafe
lifetimes1, but the document above calls out some questions in that design and proposes a different solution via "unsafe binder types". Making these their own distinct type solves a lot of those problems, and while users still need to be careful with these types by usingunsafe {}
when interconverting them, they're far more self-contained.r? @ghost
I'll be opening a lang team experiment for this before I put this up for actual review. I'm mostly putting this here so we can reference it.
Tracking:
Footnotes
https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/rfc-basic-unsafe-lifetime/16873 ↩