Add explicit lifetimes to Executor::init.#6893
Merged
bors merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom May 1, 2019
Merged
Conversation
|
r? @nrc (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
Contributor
Author
Member
|
@bors: r+ Ah yeah this is expected in the sense that some methods on Context got more restrictive in terms of lifetime requirements, and dep_targets was one of them. This represents what we are actually handing executors and makes sense it's be required to call further methods |
Contributor
|
📌 Commit 1212c91 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Contributor
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 30, 2019
Add explicit lifetimes to Executor::init. Since the unit interner was added in #6867, I am getting a strange borrow check error compiling RLS with the latest Cargo (that is, linking rls with the new cargo). Adding explicit lifetimes to the `Executor::init` function seems to fix the problem. I don't 100% understand the error, because none of the relevant function or type signatures changed in that PR. The only thing that gives me a clue is [this change](https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/pull/6867/files#diff-0bb62cb712c0811a17d7a726e068bf65L112) to `BuildPlan::add` which does something similar, but that is not directly called by RLS. The error looks like this: ``` error[E0623]: lifetime mismatch --> rls/src/build/cargo_plan.rs:149:24 | 126 | unit: &Unit<'_>, | -------- these two types are declared with different lifetimes... 127 | cx: &Context<'_, '_>, | --------------- ... 149 | let units = cx.dep_targets(unit); | ^^^^^^^^^^^ ...but data from `unit` flows into `cx` here ``` I generally don't like making changes if I don't understand them, but I'm a little stumped here how this is happening even though everything is defined with the same (`'a`) lifetime. This unblocks updating RLS to the latest Cargo.
Contributor
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-travis, status-appveyor |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Since the unit interner was added in #6867, I am getting a strange borrow check error compiling RLS with the latest Cargo (that is, linking rls with the new cargo). Adding explicit lifetimes to the
Executor::initfunction seems to fix the problem. I don't 100% understand the error, because none of the relevant function or type signatures changed in that PR. The only thing that gives me a clue is this change toBuildPlan::addwhich does something similar, but that is not directly called by RLS.The error looks like this:
I generally don't like making changes if I don't understand them, but I'm a little stumped here how this is happening even though everything is defined with the same (
'a) lifetime.This unblocks updating RLS to the latest Cargo.