Trait not imported with super::*;

[octavonce]

With the latest nightly, the bytemuck crate fails to compile. This was compiling yesterday and the issue seems to be traits are not imported with super::*. Please see the issue in the bytemuck repository: Lokathor/bytemuck#197

Meta

rustc --version --verbose:

rustc 1.72.0-nightly (fe7454bf4 2023-06-19)
binary: rustc
commit-hash: fe7454bf439c93cbe9ac8a8f7fcfacd5a40244c2
commit-date: 2023-06-19
host: x86_64-apple-darwin
release: 1.72.0-nightly
LLVM version: 16.0.5

Error output

error[E0404]: expected trait, found derive macro `NoUninit`
  --> /Users/octavonce/Projects/purple_coin/vendor/crates/bytemuck-1.13.1/src/allocation.rs:25:20
   |
25 | pub fn cast_box<A: NoUninit, B: AnyBitPattern>(input: Box<A>) -> Box<B> {
   |                    ^^^^^^^^ not a trait
   |
help: consider importing this trait instead
   |
12 + use crate::NoUninit;

[Noratrieb]

Regression in rust-lang-ci@bede4c2
searched nightlies: from nightly-2023-06-10 to nightly-2023-06-20
regressed nightly: nightly-2023-06-20
searched commit range: 2d0aa57...fe7454b
regressed commit: f217411

bisected with cargo-bisect-rustc v0.6.6

Host triple: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Reproduce with:

cargo bisect-rustc 2023-06-10 --access github

#112758

cc @bvanjoi @petrochenkov

[Noratrieb]

i made a mistake making the example, see below

```rust mod x { use std::fmt::Debug; }

use x::*;
impl Debug for () {}

This should error in coherence, but instead errors with

error[E0404]: expected trait, found derive macro Debug
--> src/main.rs:6:6
|
6 | impl Debug for () {}
| ^^^^^ not a trait
|
help: consider importing one of these items instead
|
5 + use core::fmt::Debug;
|
5 + use std::fmt::Debug;

It looks like if there is a derive macro and trait with the same name, glob imports don't resolve the trait anymore.

Note that
```rust
use std::fmt::*;

impl Debug for () {}

works correctly

[bvanjoi]

Maybe the reduced it incorrect? I found that it also throw an error for 1.70?

https://godbolt.org/z/4zYfvMxaz

[Noratrieb]

hm, maybe your change simply exposed an existing bug in more cases

[bvanjoi]

I will check it later @rustbot claim

[Noratrieb]

ah no, I made a stupid mistake, i should have used pub use :D, my example only got Debug from the prelude which only contains the macro.