rustdoc: synthetic auto: filter out clauses from the implementor's ParamEnv#123638
Merged
bors merged 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom Apr 9, 2024
Merged
Conversation
…ramEnv not just the ones from the elaborated clauses.
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
fmease
commented
Apr 8, 2024
| // FIXME(#111101): Incorporate the explicit predicates of the item here... | ||
| let item_predicates: FxIndexSet<_> = | ||
| tcx.predicates_of(item_def_id).predicates.iter().map(|(pred, _)| pred).collect(); | ||
| tcx.param_env(item_def_id).caller_bounds().iter().collect(); |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is basically a smol revert. Before my refactoring PR it looked very similar:
rust/src/librustdoc/clean/auto_trait.rs
Line 442 in da01cce
fmease
commented
Apr 8, 2024
|
|
||
| // @has supertrait_bounds/struct.Type.html | ||
| // @has - '//*[@id="synthetic-implementations-list"]//*[@class="impl"]//h3[@class="code-header"]' \ | ||
| // "impl<T> Send for Type<T>where T: Send," |
Member
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On master, this gets rendered as:
impl<T> Send for Type<T>where T: Copy + Clone + 'static + Send,Once/if I fix #111101 (might need an FCP, not sure), this will get rendered as:
impl<T> Send for Type<T>where T: Bound + Send,
GuillaumeGomez
approved these changes
Apr 9, 2024
Member
|
Awesome, thanks! @bors r+ rollup |
Collaborator
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2024
…m-param-env-clauses, r=GuillaumeGomez rustdoc: synthetic auto: filter out clauses from the implementor's ParamEnv ... not just the elaborated clauses. Fixes another regression introduced by me in rust-lang#123340, oops! Fixes rust-lang#123340 (comment), cc `@tamird.` An earlier local iteration of branch `rustdoc-simplify-auto-trait-impl-synth` (PR rust-lang#123340) contained a fix for issue rust-lang#111101 before I decided to limit the scope. I must've introduced this bug when manually reverting that part of the code. r? `@GuillaumeGomez` or rustdoc
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2024
…llaumeGomez Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#123485 (macOS: Use `libc` definitions for copyfile) - rust-lang#123633 (Store all args in the unsupported Command implementation) - rust-lang#123638 (rustdoc: synthetic auto: filter out clauses from the implementor's ParamEnv) - rust-lang#123653 (Split `non_local_definitions` lint tests in separate test files) - rust-lang#123662 (Don't rely on upvars being assigned just because coroutine-closure kind is assigned) - rust-lang#123665 (Fix typo in `Future::poll()` docs) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2024
…llaumeGomez Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#123254 (Do not allocate for ZST ThinBox (attempt 2 using const_allocate)) - rust-lang#123626 (Add MC/DC support to coverage test tools) - rust-lang#123638 (rustdoc: synthetic auto: filter out clauses from the implementor's ParamEnv) - rust-lang#123653 (Split `non_local_definitions` lint tests in separate test files) - rust-lang#123658 (Stop making any assumption about the projections applied to the upvars in the `ByMoveBody` pass) - rust-lang#123662 (Don't rely on upvars being assigned just because coroutine-closure kind is assigned) - rust-lang#123665 (Fix typo in `Future::poll()` docs) - rust-lang#123672 (compiletest: unset `RUSTC_LOG_COLOR`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 9, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#123638 - fmease:rustdoc-synth-auto-yeet-item-param-env-clauses, r=GuillaumeGomez rustdoc: synthetic auto: filter out clauses from the implementor's ParamEnv ... not just the elaborated clauses. Fixes another regression introduced by me in rust-lang#123340, oops! Fixes rust-lang#123340 (comment), cc ``@tamird.`` An earlier local iteration of branch `rustdoc-simplify-auto-trait-impl-synth` (PR rust-lang#123340) contained a fix for issue rust-lang#111101 before I decided to limit the scope. I must've introduced this bug when manually reverting that part of the code. r? ``@GuillaumeGomez`` or rustdoc
tamird
added a commit
to tamird/aya
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 10, 2024
This is roughly a revert of af1a9b3; see rust-lang/rust#123638.
Contributor
|
Thanks! This indeed addressed #123340 (comment). |
tamird
added a commit
to aya-rs/aya
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 10, 2024
This is roughly a revert of af1a9b3; see rust-lang/rust#123638.
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.
... not just the elaborated clauses.
Fixes another regression introduced by me in #123340, oops!
Fixes #123340 (comment), cc @tamird.
An earlier local iteration of branch
rustdoc-simplify-auto-trait-impl-synth(PR #123340) included a fix for issue #111101 before I decided to limit the scope of the patch. I must've introduced this bug when manually reverting that part of the code.r? @GuillaumeGomez or rustdoc