Don't fire OPAQUE_HIDDEN_INFERRED_BOUND on sized return of AFIT
#120360
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
|
r? @estebank (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
r? lcnr (or re-roll to types if you dont care to review this pr) |
|
@bors r rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#117420 (Make `#![allow_internal_unstable(..)]` work with `stmt_expr_attributes`) - rust-lang#117678 (Stabilize `slice_group_by`) - rust-lang#119917 (Remove special-case handling of `vec.split_off(0)`) - rust-lang#120117 (Update `std::io::Error::downcast` return type) - rust-lang#120329 (RFC 3349 precursors) - rust-lang#120339 (privacy: Refactor top-level visiting in `NamePrivacyVisitor`) - rust-lang#120345 (Clippy subtree update) - rust-lang#120360 (Don't fire `OPAQUE_HIDDEN_INFERRED_BOUND` on sized return of AFIT) - rust-lang#120372 (Fix outdated comment on Box) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 26, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#120360 - compiler-errors:afit-sized-lol, r=lcnr Don't fire `OPAQUE_HIDDEN_INFERRED_BOUND` on sized return of AFIT Conceptually, we should probably not fire `OPAQUE_HIDDEN_INFERRED_BOUND` for methods like: ``` trait Foo { async fn bar() -> Self; } ``` Even though we technically cannot prove that `Self: Sized`, which is one of the item bounds of the `Output` type in the `-> impl Future<Output = Sized>` from the async desugaring. This is somewhat justifiable along the same lines as how we allow regular methods to return `-> Self` even though `Self` isn't sized. Fixes rust-lang#113538 (side-note: some days i wonder if we should just remove the `OPAQUE_HIDDEN_INFERRED_BOUND` lint... it does make me sad that we have non-well-formed types in signatures, though.)
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.
Conceptually, we should probably not fire
OPAQUE_HIDDEN_INFERRED_BOUNDfor methods like:Even though we technically cannot prove that
Self: Sized, which is one of the item bounds of theOutputtype in the-> impl Future<Output = Sized>from the async desugaring.This is somewhat justifiable along the same lines as how we allow regular methods to return
-> Selfeven thoughSelfisn't sized.Fixes #113538
(side-note: some days i wonder if we should just remove the
OPAQUE_HIDDEN_INFERRED_BOUNDlint... it does make me sad that we have non-well-formed types in signatures, though.)