Move a const-prop-lint specific hack from mir interpret to const-prop-lint and make it fallible#109938
Move a const-prop-lint specific hack from mir interpret to const-prop-lint and make it fallible#109938bors merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Conversation
…-lint and make it fallible
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @WaffleLapkin (or someone else) soon. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. Namely, in order to ensure the minimum review times lag, PR authors and assigned reviewers should ensure that the review label (
|
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
compiler-errors
added
the
beta-nominated
…mpiler-errors Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#109723 (Pull some tuple variant fields out into their own struct) - rust-lang#109838 (Fix `non_exhaustive_omitted_patterns` lint span) - rust-lang#109901 (Enforce VarDebugInfo::Place in MIR validation.) - rust-lang#109913 (Doc-comment `IndexVec::from_elem` and use it in a few more places) - rust-lang#109914 (Emit feature error for parenthesized generics in associated type bounds) - rust-lang#109919 (rustdoc: escape GAT args in more cases) - rust-lang#109937 (Don't collect return-position impl traits for documentation) - rust-lang#109938 (Move a const-prop-lint specific hack from mir interpret to const-prop-lint and make it fallible) - rust-lang#109940 (Add regression test for rust-lang#93911) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
| // that the `RevealAll` pass has happened and that the body's consts | ||
| // are normalized, so any call to resolve before that needs to be | ||
| // manually normalized. | ||
| let val = self.tcx.try_normalize_erasing_regions(self.param_env, c.literal).ok()?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this needs to be added to the equivalent method in the ConstProp opt too?
rustbot
added
the
beta-accepted
emilyalbini
removed
the
beta-nominated
|
Strange, why did the bot not ping wg-const-eval here? Though you also got the first-time contributor message, so clearly the bot was confused... |
|
Oli is special and (always?) usually gets the first-time contributor message. |
|
Oh, fascinating. Seems worth a bug report for the bot though? Is there an issue tracking this? |
|
I'm not aware of one but also don't know where one would be reported. |
|
https://github.com/rust-lang/triagebot, I think. |
…troalbini [stable] Prepare Rust 1.69.0 Last minute backports: * rust-lang#109643 * rust-lang#110135 * rust-lang#109938 * rust-lang#109937 * rust-lang#109266 This PR also bumps the channel to stable, and backports the release notes from master. r? `@ghost` cc `@rust-lang/release`
10 participants
fixes #109743
This hack didn't need to live in the mir interpreter. For const-prop-lint it is entirely correct to avoid doing any const prop if normalization fails at this stage. Most likely we couldn't const propagate anything anyway, and if revealing was needed (so opaque types were involved), we wouldn't want to be too smart and leak the hidden type anyway.