Provide structured suggestions when finding structs when expecting a trait #77087
Conversation
|
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
jyn514
added
T-compiler
estebank
force-pushed
the
issue-45817
branch
from
403a675 to
b10dae8
Compare
estebank
changed the title
estebank
changed the title
|
vs
and
vs
|
| }; | ||
| if !(matches!( | ||
| partial_res.base_res(), | ||
| hir::def::Res::Def(hir::def::DefKind::AssocTy, _) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this needed? This suggestion would also make sense for <&T as Trait>::Assoc: String
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you might have meant to point at the next matches check, as this one just verifies that we are trying to constrain an associated type. The last commit now accounts for references. I have these checks because I want to avoid incorrect suggestions, as that is more harmful than not providing a suggestion we could have.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For future reference, this will not help for a case like <(T, T) as Trait>::Assoc: String.
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 4ae8f6e has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions, checks-azure |
When finding an ADT in a trait object definition provide some solutions. Fix #45817.
Given
<Param as Trait>::Assoc: TysuggestParam: Trait<Assoc = Ty>. Fix #75829.