-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 389
Commit c7fc29a
committed
Auto merge of #132329 - compiler-errors:fn-and-destruct, r=lcnr
Implement `~const Destruct` effect goal in the new solver
This also fixed a subtle bug/limitation of the `NeedsConstDrop` check. Specifically, the "`Qualif`" API basically treats const drops as totally structural, even though dropping something that has an explicit `Drop` implementation cannot be structurally decomposed. For example:
```rust
#![feature(const_trait_impl)]
#[const_trait] trait Foo {
fn foo();
}
struct Conditional<T: Foo>(T);
impl Foo for () {
fn foo() {
println!("uh oh");
}
}
impl<T> const Drop for Conditional<T> where T: ~const Foo {
fn drop(&mut self) {
T::foo();
}
}
const FOO: () = {
let _ = Conditional(());
//~^ This should error.
};
fn main() {}
```
In this example, when checking if the `Conditional(())` rvalue is const-drop, since `Conditional` has a const destructor, we would previously recurse into the `()` value and determine it has nothing to drop, which means that it is considered to *not* need a const drop -- even though dropping `Conditional(())` would mean evaluating the destructor which relies on that `T: const Foo` bound to hold!
This could be fixed alternatively by banning any const conditions on `const Drop` impls, but that really sucks -- that means that basically no *interesting* const drop impls could be written. We have the capability to totally and intuitively support the right behavior, which I've implemented here.File tree
Expand file treeCollapse file tree
0 file changed
+0
-0
lines changedFilter options
Expand file treeCollapse file tree
0 file changed
+0
-0
lines changed
0 commit comments