Pretty print pattern type values with transmute if they don't satisfy their pattern #136235
+50
−15
Conversation
This file contains 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
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred to the CTFE machinery cc @rust-lang/wg-const-eval |
lcnr
reviewed
Jan 29, 2025
| cx.validate_operand( | ||
| &allocated.into(), | ||
| /*recursive*/ false, | ||
| /*reset_provenance_and_padding*/ false, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
existing, but maybe use enums instead of bool + comments :3
oli-obk
force-pushed
the
transmuty-pat-tys
branch
from
ace8014 to
291f59b
Compare
RalfJung
reviewed
Jan 30, 2025
compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/util/validate_scalar_in_layout.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
RalfJung
reviewed
Jan 30, 2025
compiler/rustc_const_eval/src/util/validate_scalar_in_layout.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
oli-obk
force-pushed
the
transmuty-pat-tys
branch
from
291f59b to
7ec029c
Compare
RalfJung
reviewed
Feb 2, 2025
| let typing_env = ty::TypingEnv::fully_monomorphized(); | ||
| let mut cx = InterpCx::new(tcx.tcx, tcx.span, typing_env, machine); | ||
|
|
||
| let Ok(layout) = cx.layout_of(ty) else { return false }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reporting false in case of a layout computation error seems odd? This is almost certainly a bug, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I could just unwrap it and we'll do it properly when we can write a test for it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That works for me.
@matthiaskrgr heads-up if you see this ICE, please ping us and thanks in advance for generating a test case. :)
|
r=me with the unwrap. |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-author
oli-obk
force-pushed
the
transmuty-pat-tys
branch
from
7ec029c to
9e50c77
Compare
…fy their pattern
oli-obk
force-pushed
the
transmuty-pat-tys
branch
from
9e50c77 to
5465770
Compare
|
@bors r=RalfJung |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
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.
Instead of printing
0_u32 is 1.., we now print the default fallback rendering that we also use for invalid bools, chars, ...:{transmute(0x00000000): (u32) is 1..=}.These cases can occur in mir dumps when const prop propagates a constant across a safety check that would prevent the actually UB value from existing. That's fine though, as it's dead code and we always need to allow UB in dead code.
follow-up to #136176
cc @compiler-errors @scottmcm
r? @RalfJung because of the interpreter changes