Skip to content

librustc: Parse and resolve higher-rank lifetimes in traits. #17028

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 23, 2014

Conversation

pcwalton
Copy link
Contributor

@pcwalton pcwalton commented Sep 5, 2014

They will ICE during typechecking if used, because they depend on trait
reform.

This is part of unboxed closures.

r? @nikomatsakis

@brson
Copy link
Contributor

brson commented Sep 9, 2014

@pnkfelix Perhaps you can review?

ast::ItemTrait(ref generics, _, _, _) => {
let scope: ScopeChain =
EarlyScope(subst::TypeSpace, &generics.lifetimes, &root);
self.check_lifetime_defs(&generics.lifetimes, &scope);
scope
}
ast::ItemImpl(ref generics, _, _, _) => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

did this need to get split off into its own clause? Or was this change an artifact of earlier code instrumentation that you since removed?

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

looks good to me; r=me with nits above addressed.

@pcwalton pcwalton force-pushed the higher-rank-trait-lifetimes branch from c260ac6 to 533feba Compare September 22, 2014 21:31
They will ICE during typechecking if used, because they depend on trait
reform.

This is part of unboxed closures.
@pcwalton pcwalton force-pushed the higher-rank-trait-lifetimes branch from 533feba to 5376b1c Compare September 23, 2014 04:15
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 23, 2014
…nkfelix

They will ICE during typechecking if used, because they depend on trait
reform.

This is part of unboxed closures.

r? @nikomatsakis
@bors bors closed this Sep 23, 2014
@bors bors merged commit 5376b1c into rust-lang:master Sep 23, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants