Generate Normalize
clauses for dyn and opaque types
#780
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
When a trait
Trait
has a transitive supertrait defined liketrait SuperTrait: AnotherTrait<Assoc = Ty>
, we've been generatingimpl AnotherTrait
fordyn Trait
andopaque type T: Trait
but without accounting for the associated type bound. This patch addsNormalize
clauses that correspond to such bounds.For example, given the following definition
we generate the following clauses
I think this doesn't contradict #203 as "we may legitimately assume that all things talking directly about
?Self
are true", but I'm not really sure if this is the right direction. One caveat is that this patch exacerbates "wastefulness" as in this comment as it adds theNormalize
clauses even when we're trying to prove other kinds of goals.Fixes #777