Skip to content

Improve location reporting of trait placeholder error #124977

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Improve location reporting of trait placeholder error #124977

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

Self-explanatory

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented May 10, 2024

r? @cjgillot

rustbot has assigned @cjgillot.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels May 10, 2024
fmease
fmease reviewed May 10, 2024
View reviewed changes
compiler/rustc_borrowck/src/region_infer/mod.rs
Comment on lines 2061 to 2012
// We currently do not store the `DefId` in the `ConstraintCategory`
// for performances reasons. The error reporting code used by NLL only
// uses the span, so this doesn't cause any problems at the moment.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
// We currently do not store the `DefId` in the `ConstraintCategory`
// for performances reasons. The error reporting code used by NLL only
// uses the span, so this doesn't cause any problems at the moment.

or adjust accordingly?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LOL

cjgillot
cjgillot reviewed May 10, 2024
View reviewed changes
tests/ui/coroutine/resume-arg-late-bound.stderr
@@ -1,10 +1,13 @@
error: implementation of `Coroutine` is not general enough
--> $DIR/resume-arg-late-bound.rs:15:5
|
LL | fn test(a: impl for<'a> Coroutine<&'a mut bool>) {}
| ------------------------------- due to a where-clause on `test`...
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The terminology may be a bit surprising here.

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

for performance purposes

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label May 10, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 10, 2024

⌛ Trying commit 70dcbe4 with merge ddbd46c...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 10, 2024
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#124977 - compiler-errors:higher-ranked-err, r…
ddbd46c 
…=<try>

Improve location reporting of trait placeholder error

Self-explanatory
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented May 10, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: ddbd46c (ddbd46cbd64e24ca82a50060455f3d7b74eb205e)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (ddbd46c): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -1.9% [-1.9%, -1.9%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.9% [-1.9%, -1.9%] 1

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 2.8% [2.8%, 2.8%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -2.2% [-2.2%, -2.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -2.2% [-2.2%, -2.2%] 1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 676.223s -> 674.916s (-0.19%)
Artifact size: 315.83 MiB -> 315.95 MiB (0.04%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label May 10, 2024
@cjgillot cjgillot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels May 19, 2024
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jul 16, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 17, 2024

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #127831) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

cjgillot
cjgillot reviewed Jul 19, 2024
View reviewed changes
compiler/rustc_borrowck/src/type_check/canonical.rs
Comment on lines 102 to 103
// Keep this parameter for now, in case we start using
// it in `ConstraintCategory` at some point.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
// Keep this parameter for now, in case we start using
// it in `ConstraintCategory` at some point.

compiler/rustc_infer/src/infer/error_reporting/nice_region_error/placeholder_error.rs
let (leading_ellipsis, satisfy_span, where_span, dup_span, def_id) =
if let ObligationCauseCode::WhereClause(def_id, span)
| ObligationCauseCode::WhereClauseInExpr(def_id, span, ..) = *cause.code()
&& def_id != CRATE_DEF_ID.to_def_id()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is this check removed? process_registered_region_obligations still introduces a dummy crate def-id. Won't it cause issues?

@cjgillot cjgillot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 19, 2024
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

This is a nice improvement but I have no time for this anymore.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@cjgillot cjgillot cjgillot left review comments

@fmease fmease fmease left review comments

Assignees

@cjgillot cjgillot

Labels
S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@compiler-errors @rustbot @rust-timer @bors @cjgillot @fmease