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.

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

Don't implement AsyncFn for FnDef/FnPtr that wouldnt implement Fn #128791

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 9, 2024

Conversation

compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

@compiler-errors compiler-errors commented Aug 7, 2024

Due to unsafety, ABI, or the presence of target features, some FnDef/FnPtr types don't implement Fn*. Do the same for AsyncFn*.

Noticed this due to #128764, but this isn't really related to that ICE, which is fixed in #128792.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Aug 7, 2024

r? @lcnr

rustbot has assigned @lcnr.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@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. WG-trait-system-refactor The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver) labels Aug 7, 2024
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Aug 8, 2024

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 8, 2024

📌 Commit 8c14c3d has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 8, 2024
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2024
…=lcnr

Don't implement `AsyncFn` for `FnDef`/`FnPtr` that wouldnt implement `Fn`

Due to unsafety, ABI, or the presence of target features, some `FnDef`/`FnPtr` types don't implement `Fn*`. Do the same for `AsyncFn*`.

Noticed this due to rust-lang#128764, but this isn't really related to that ICE, which is fixed in rust-lang#128792.
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2024
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#128306 (Update NonNull::align_offset quarantees)
 - rust-lang#128612 (Make `validate_mir` ensure the final MIR for all bodies)
 - rust-lang#128648 (Add regression test)
 - rust-lang#128791 (Don't implement `AsyncFn` for `FnDef`/`FnPtr` that wouldnt implement `Fn`)
 - rust-lang#128795 (Update E0517 message to reflect RFC 2195.)
 - rust-lang#128825 (rm `declared_features` field in resolver)
 - rust-lang#128826 (Only suggest `#[allow]` for `--warn` and `--deny` lint level flags)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

@bors r-
#128829 (comment)

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Aug 8, 2024
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member Author

Split the test into two, so I can gate the target feature part correctly.

@bors r=lcnr

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 8, 2024

📌 Commit ec1c424 has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Aug 8, 2024
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 8, 2024
…=lcnr

Don't implement `AsyncFn` for `FnDef`/`FnPtr` that wouldnt implement `Fn`

Due to unsafety, ABI, or the presence of target features, some `FnDef`/`FnPtr` types don't implement `Fn*`. Do the same for `AsyncFn*`.

Noticed this due to rust-lang#128764, but this isn't really related to that ICE, which is fixed in rust-lang#128792.
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 9, 2024
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 8 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#128640 (rwlock: disable 'frob' test in Miri on macOS)
 - rust-lang#128791 (Don't implement `AsyncFn` for `FnDef`/`FnPtr` that wouldnt implement `Fn`)
 - rust-lang#128806 (Split `ColorConfig` off of `HumanReadableErrorType`)
 - rust-lang#128818 (std float tests: special-case Miri in feature detection)
 - rust-lang#128834 (rustdoc: strip unreachable modules)
 - rust-lang#128836 (rustdoc-json: add a test for impls on private & hidden types)
 - rust-lang#128837 (Clippy subtree update)
 - rust-lang#128851 (Add comment that bors did not see pushed before it merged)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit bcf6f9f into rust-lang:master Aug 9, 2024
6 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.82.0 milestone Aug 9, 2024
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 9, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#128791 - compiler-errors:async-fn-unsafe, r=lcnr

Don't implement `AsyncFn` for `FnDef`/`FnPtr` that wouldnt implement `Fn`

Due to unsafety, ABI, or the presence of target features, some `FnDef`/`FnPtr` types don't implement `Fn*`. Do the same for `AsyncFn*`.

Noticed this due to rust-lang#128764, but this isn't really related to that ICE, which is fixed in rust-lang#128792.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. WG-trait-system-refactor The Rustc Trait System Refactor Initiative (-Znext-solver)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants