numeric vars can only be unified with numerical types in deep reject

[compiler-errors]

Don't consider numeric vars (int and float vars) to unify with non-numeric types during deep reject. This helps us reject incompatible impls sooner.

[compiler-errors]

Not sure how hot this code is

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[bors]

⌛ Trying commit 1d7192d with merge 150385fcf5e9674355fce2f1c935e0a743fc68dc...

[bors]

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 150385fcf5e9674355fce2f1c935e0a743fc68dc (150385fcf5e9674355fce2f1c935e0a743fc68dc)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (150385fcf5e9674355fce2f1c935e0a743fc68dc): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-1.8%, -0.3%]	28
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.7%	[-1.7%, -0.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.7%	[-1.8%, -0.3%]	28

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.8%	[2.8%, 2.8%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.6%	[2.5%, 2.7%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.2%	[-1.2%, -1.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.3%	[-2.6%, -2.1%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[-1.2%, 2.8%]	2

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.7%	[-2.0%, -1.4%]	5
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.7%	[-2.0%, -1.4%]	5

[compiler-errors]

r? compiler

[compiler-errors]

lcnr already has a lot of my prs assigned to them, let's give them a break 😂

r? compiler

[lcnr]

considering that i've already gotten pinged 😁

r? @lcnr

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 1d7192d has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 1d7192d with merge a10d4efe4e40b4a50379cf156c7accd44526662c...

[bors]

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

[lcnr]

spurious?

@bors retry

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 1d7192d with merge 276029d...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: lcnr
Pushing 276029d to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (276029d): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression
cc @rust-lang/wg-compiler-performance

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.6%	[0.6%, 0.6%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.4%	[0.3%, 0.5%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-1.8%, -0.2%]	44
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.8%	[-1.5%, -0.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-1.8%, 0.6%]	47

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.6%	[2.6%, 2.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.2%	[2.2%, 2.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.3%	[-3.7%, -2.9%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.5%	[-2.8%, -2.1%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.3%	[-3.7%, 2.6%]	3

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.7%	[-2.6%, -1.2%]	9
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.7%	[-2.6%, -1.2%]	9

[nnethercote]

Improvements greatly outweigh regressions.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged