@@ -327,11 +327,10 @@ fn equate<'tcx>(
327327 return true ;
328328 } ;
329329
330- let selcx = & mut SelectionContext :: new ( & infcx) ;
331330 let opt_failing_obligation = obligations
332331 . into_iter ( )
333332 . chain ( more_obligations)
334- . find ( |o| negative_impl_exists ( selcx , o, body_def_id) ) ;
333+ . find ( |o| negative_impl_exists ( infcx , o, body_def_id) ) ;
335334
336335 if let Some ( failing_obligation) = opt_failing_obligation {
337336 debug ! ( "overlap: obligation unsatisfiable {:?}" , failing_obligation) ;
@@ -342,19 +341,19 @@ fn equate<'tcx>(
342341}
343342
344343/// Try to prove that a negative impl exist for the given obligation and its super predicates.
345- #[ instrument( level = "debug" , skip( selcx ) ) ]
346- fn negative_impl_exists < ' cx , ' tcx > (
347- selcx : & SelectionContext < ' cx , ' tcx > ,
344+ #[ instrument( level = "debug" , skip( infcx ) ) ]
345+ fn negative_impl_exists < ' tcx > (
346+ infcx : & InferCtxt < ' tcx > ,
348347 o : & PredicateObligation < ' tcx > ,
349348 body_def_id : DefId ,
350349) -> bool {
351- if resolve_negative_obligation ( selcx . infcx ( ) . fork ( ) , o, body_def_id) {
350+ if resolve_negative_obligation ( infcx. fork ( ) , o, body_def_id) {
352351 return true ;
353352 }
354353
355354 // Try to prove a negative obligation exists for super predicates
356- for o in util:: elaborate_predicates ( selcx . tcx ( ) , iter:: once ( o. predicate ) ) {
357- if resolve_negative_obligation ( selcx . infcx ( ) . fork ( ) , & o, body_def_id) {
355+ for o in util:: elaborate_predicates ( infcx . tcx , iter:: once ( o. predicate ) ) {
356+ if resolve_negative_obligation ( infcx. fork ( ) , & o, body_def_id) {
358357 return true ;
359358 }
360359 }
0 commit comments