Add long error explanation for E0495#64404
Conversation
|
Some changes occurred in diagnostic error codes |
|
r? @cramertj (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
src/librustc/error_codes.rs
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the single-field tuple necessary here? and the match (could it be a let)? It seems like they're adding extra confusion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you're right, I was too focused on simplifying the lifetime change.
src/librustc/error_codes.rs
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure whether this example is representative of the majority of places where users encounter this error-- if users are hitting an error due to mismatched lifetimes, IME it's rare that it's easily solvable by just adding a bound in one location.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you have another example in mind by any chance? Maybe another example would be the best thing to do to avoid confusing users.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't have an easy one that would be representative offhand, sorry. There are a number of things I've seen cause this error, and I don't have a good idea which is the most important to cover, nor what broader categories issues fall into.
|
Ping from triage. |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #64658) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
@GuillaumeGomez can you rebase this? looks good to me |
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
|
@Dylan-DPC Don't know what you did but that suddenly broke badly. :p I'll take a look tomorrow. |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #64886) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
e17987f to
37b5efa
Compare
|
Updated. |
|
@bors r+ rollup Seems fine to land to me, thanks! |
|
📌 Commit 37b5efa has been approved by |
Add long error explanation for E0495 Part of rust-lang#61137.
37b5efa to
be89e52
Compare
|
I rebased and tests passed so I assume the error doesn't come from here but from its merge with another PR. Therefore this r- shouldn't be here. @bors: r=cramertj rollup- |
|
📌 Commit be89e52 has been approved by |
|
@bors retry rolled up. |
Add long error explanation for E0495 Part of rust-lang#61137.
|
@GuillaumeGomez In general you can reproduce failures like this by running tl;dr I think you need to update the nll output. |
|
Hey @Centril maybe scenarios like this are a reason for us to remove compare-mode=nll ... or at least stop gating CI on it |
|
@tmandry That explains why I couldn't reproduce. Thanks for the info! I'll update the PR tomorrow. |
|
@pnkfelix we should probably inventory the reasons why we still use compare-mode=nll and then see if removing it would be safe (but that's for a different issue). |
be89e52 to
9bf9aea
Compare
|
Updated btw. |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #65178) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
9bf9aea to
7fb2820
Compare
7fb2820 to
96efaad
Compare
|
Updated. |
|
@bors r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 96efaad has been approved by |
Add long error explanation for E0495 Part of rust-lang#61137.
Add long error explanation for E0495 Part of rust-lang#61137.
Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - #64404 (Add long error explanation for E0495) - #64918 (Add long error explanation for E0551) - #65102 (Disable stack probe when thread sanitizer is enabled) - #65120 (Correctly estimate the required space for string in `StyledBuffer::prepend`) - #65145 (When suggesting assoc function with type params, include turbofish) - #65162 (Remove loaded_from_cache map from DepGraph) - #65176 (Remove query-related macros) - #65179 (Add long error explanation for E0567) Failed merges: r? @ghost
Part of #61137.