Conversation
|
Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy cc @rust-lang/clippy Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_cranelift cc @bjorn3 Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri engine cc @rust-lang/miri Some changes occurred in const_evaluatable.rs cc @lcnr |
lcnr
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nice, small nits, then r=me
compiler/rustc_middle/src/mir/mod.rs
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah, once we've removed visit_mir_constant we should be able to remove this, probably makes sense to do that in yet another pr 😁
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #102061) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
6f42f1a to
85aa94f
Compare
23d044f to
fad44e0
Compare
compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/transform/check_consts/qualifs.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
@bors delegate+ |
|
✌️ @b-naber can now approve this pull request |
fad44e0 to
43ddb7f
Compare
43ddb7f to
a705e65
Compare
| callee_body.required_consts.iter().copied().filter(|&ct| match ct.literal { | ||
| ConstantKind::Ty(_) => { | ||
| bug!("should never encounter ty::Unevaluated in `required_consts`") | ||
| bug!("should never encounter ty::UnevaluatedConst in `required_consts`") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this should be "unexpected ty::Const"
|
@bors r+ rollup=never maybe perf relevant, probably not 🤷 the queue is pretty short rn |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (9a963e3): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)ResultsThis 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.
CyclesResultsThis 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.
Footnotes |
Introduce mir::Unevaluated Previously the distinction between unevaluated constants in the type-system and in mir was not explicit and a little confusing. Probably better to introduce its own type for that. r? `@lcnr`
Previously the distinction between unevaluated constants in the type-system and in mir was not explicit and a little confusing. Probably better to introduce its own type for that.
r? @lcnr