More correct method resolution #2463
Merged
Conversation
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
kjeremy
reviewed
Dec 2, 2019
| | (Ty::Infer(InferTy::IntVar(tv)), other @ ty_app!(TypeCtor::Int(_))) | ||
| | (other @ ty_app!(TypeCtor::Int(_)), Ty::Infer(InferTy::IntVar(tv))) | ||
| | (Ty::Infer(InferTy::FloatVar(tv)), other @ ty_app!(TypeCtor::Float(_))) | ||
| | (other @ ty_app!(TypeCtor::Float(_)), Ty::Infer(InferTy::FloatVar(tv))) => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is hard to read but I'm not sure how I would clean it up.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah. I feel that type inference is that sort of code where the essential complexity is pretty high, and the only way to make sure that code is maintainable is thorough test coverage.
matklad
reviewed
Dec 3, 2019
matklad
reviewed
Dec 3, 2019
| let self_ty_with_vars = db.impl_self_ty(impl_id).subst(&vars); | ||
| let self_ty_with_vars = | ||
| Canonical { num_vars: vars.len(), value: &self_ty_with_vars }; | ||
| if let Some(substs) = super::infer::unify(self_ty_with_vars, &self_ty.value) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
that's refactored away 🙂
|
LGTM! |
|
bors r+ |
bors bot
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 3, 2019
2463: More correct method resolution r=flodiebold a=flodiebold This should fix the order in which candidates for method resolution are considered, i.e. `(&Foo).clone()` should now be of type `Foo` instead of `&Foo`. It also checks for inherent candidates that the self type unifies properly with the self type in the impl (i.e. `impl Foo<u32>` methods will only be considered for `Foo<u32>`). To be able to get the correct receiver type to check in the method resolution, I needed the unification logic, so I extracted it to the `unify.rs` module. Should fix #2435. Co-authored-by: Florian Diebold <[email protected]>
Build succeeded
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
This should fix the order in which candidates for method resolution are considered, i.e.
(&Foo).clone()should now be of typeFooinstead of&Foo. It also checks for inherent candidates that the self type unifies properly with the self type in the impl (i.e.impl Foo<u32>methods will only be considered forFoo<u32>).To be able to get the correct receiver type to check in the method resolution, I needed the unification logic, so I extracted it to the
unify.rsmodule.Should fix #2435.