Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

correctly handle normalization in implied bounds query v2 #118404

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

correctly handle normalization in implied bounds query v2 #118404

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

aliemjay
Copy link
Member

Revives #109482. I've opened a new PR because Github doesn't allow me to reuse the old one.

Updated to refresh the toolchain build in order to test bevy.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 28, 2023

r? @spastorino

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Nov 28, 2023
@aliemjay aliemjay added S-experimental Status: Ongoing experiment that does not require reviewing and won't be merged in its current state. T-types Relevant to the types team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Nov 28, 2023
@rust-cloud-vms rust-cloud-vms bot force-pushed the implied-bounds-normalize branch from 191576e to b3e3b53 Compare November 28, 2023 07:51
@aliemjay
Copy link
Member Author

@bors try

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 28, 2023

⌛ Trying commit b3e3b53 with merge 76cedeb...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Nov 28, 2023
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#118404 - aliemjay:implied-bounds-normalize, r…
76cedeb 
…=<try>

 correctly handle normalization in implied bounds query v2

Revives rust-lang#109482. I've opened a new PR because Github doesn't allow me to reuse the old one.

Updated to refresh the toolchain build in order to test bevy.
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 28, 2023

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 76cedeb (76cedeb79cbb1c61855d11e8dca54a01b3391148)

1 similar comment
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 28, 2023

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 76cedeb (76cedeb79cbb1c61855d11e8dca54a01b3391148)

@aliemjay
Copy link
Member Author

superseded by #118553.

@aliemjay aliemjay closed this Dec 17, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
S-experimental Status: Ongoing experiment that does not require reviewing and won't be merged in its current state. S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-types Relevant to the types team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@aliemjay @rustbot @bors @spastorino