-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
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.
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
remove unnecessary eval_verify_bound
#133810
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
r=me |
@bors r+ |
…iaskrgr Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#133651 (Update `NonZero` and `NonNull` to not field-project (per MCP#807)) - rust-lang#133764 (rustdoc: Rename `set_back_info` to `restore_module_data`.) - rust-lang#133784 (Fix MutVisitor's default implementations to visit Stmt's and BinOp's spans) - rust-lang#133798 (stop replacing bivariant args with `'static` when computing closure requirements) - rust-lang#133804 (Improve code for FileName retrieval in rustdoc) - rust-lang#133817 (Use `eprintln` instead of `println` in bootstrap/compiletest/tidy) Failed merges: - rust-lang#133810 (remove unnecessary `eval_verify_bound`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #133841) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Did you look at the issue that was cited @lcnr ? |
I have to bring this back into cache but I can imagine cases where the closure knows about regions and things that the caller doesn't. Is this already excluding local regions related to the body of the closure? |
I have 🤔 the affected test no longer relies on this. We only ever try to promote type tests which we fail to prove locally. This check would only apply if we fail to prove |
This does not impact any tests. I feel like any cases where this could useful should instead be fixed by a general improvement to
eval_verify_bound
to avoid having to promote thisTypeTest
in the first place 🤔r? types cc @nikomatsakis