[ty] Derive PartialOrd, Ord for KnownInstanceType
#18340
Merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Summary
Unlike a series of integers or strings, there's no self-evident way in which a series of
KnownInstanceTypes should always be ordered if you're sorting them. This has always been the motivation for not derivingPartialOrdandOrdon this enum, and instead tediously writing this hugematchstatement out by hand.Following #18212, however, we must explicitly derive
PartialOrdandOrdfor any Salsa-tracked structs that we wish to sort into an order. This is a good change -- it sharply brings into focus the fact that the orderings Salsa was previously implicitly deriving for us were also arbitrary orderings that had no grounding in the underlying type being represented by the Salsa ID. We already knew this, but now it's explicit.The ordering of
KnownInstanceTypes isn't inherently any more arbitrary than the orderings we're deriving elsewhere; so let's just derivePartialOrd, Ordhere too. It makes the code a fair bit simpler :-)Test Plan
cargo test -p ty_python_semantic