-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
Suggest using a temporary variable to fix borrowck errors #83174
Conversation
r? @oli-obk (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
compiler/rustc_mir/src/borrow_check/diagnostics/conflict_errors.rs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #84822) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Starting with a rebase so this doesn't get too stale. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Status update: I've figured out, and implemented, a way to find the locations of |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
FYI, I just noticed this (pre-existing) test has a typo in it, but it probably shouldn't matter now that MIR borrowck is the default, right? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@oli-obk I've made some progress on this. When you get a chance, could you look at the code and the errors? There are a few issues where the wrong span is used, but the false positive rate is much lower 🎉
I left comments on all the test outputs that have issues. I would appreciate suggestions on how to improve the accuracy :)
help: ...and then using that local as the argument to this call | ||
--> $DIR/two-phase-nonrecv-autoref.rs:51:9 | ||
| | ||
LL | f(f(10)); | ||
| ^ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This span's not great, but not terrible either.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like it more than the one that goes to the end of the call as spans won't overlap this way
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This regressed with #83174 (comment); the suggestion is no longer reported. I think let's just leave it for now.
📌 Commit 381b275 has been approved by |
🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 100. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened. |
@oli-obk thank you so much for helping me with this PR over the past 9 months! ❤️ |
Suggest using a temporary variable to fix borrowck errors Fixes rust-lang#77834. In Rust, nesting method calls with both require `&mut` access to `self` produces a borrow-check error: error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time --> src/lib.rs:7:14 | 7 | self.foo(self.bar()); | ---------^^^^^^^^^^- | | | | | | | second mutable borrow occurs here | | first borrow later used by call | first mutable borrow occurs here That's because Rust has a left-to-right evaluation order, and the method receiver is passed first. Thus, the argument to the method cannot then mutate `self`. There's an easy solution to this error: just extract a local variable for the inner argument: let tmp = self.bar(); self.foo(tmp); However, the error doesn't give any suggestion of how to solve the problem. As a result, new users may assume that it's impossible to express their code correctly and get stuck. This commit adds a (non-structured) suggestion to extract a local variable for the inner argument to solve the error. The suggestion uses heuristics that eliminate most false positives, though there are a few false negatives (cases where the suggestion should be emitted but is not). Those other cases can be implemented in a future change.
@bors r- rollup- |
In Rust, nesting method calls with both require `&mut` access to `self` produces a borrow-check error: error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time --> src/lib.rs:7:14 | 7 | self.foo(self.bar()); | ---------^^^^^^^^^^- | | | | | | | second mutable borrow occurs here | | first borrow later used by call | first mutable borrow occurs here That's because Rust has a left-to-right evaluation order, and the method receiver is passed first. Thus, the argument to the method cannot then mutate `self`. There's an easy solution to this error: just extract a local variable for the inner argument: let tmp = self.bar(); self.foo(tmp); However, the error doesn't give any suggestion of how to solve the problem. As a result, new users may assume that it's impossible to express their code correctly and get stuck. This commit adds a (non-structured) suggestion to extract a local variable for the inner argument to solve the error. The suggestion uses heuristics that eliminate most false positives, though there are a few false negatives (cases where the suggestion should be emitted but is not). Those other cases can be implemented in a future change.
help: try adding a local storing this argument... | ||
--> $DIR/suggest-local-var-imm-and-mut.rs:12:22 | ||
| | ||
LL | self.foo(self.bar()); | ||
| ^^^^^^^^^^ | ||
help: ...and then using that local as the argument to this call | ||
--> $DIR/suggest-local-var-imm-and-mut.rs:12:13 | ||
| | ||
LL | self.foo(self.bar()); | ||
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's intriguing that the suggestion doesn't show up in normal mode but does (correctly) show up in nll mode.
@bors r=oli-obk |
📌 Commit e273152 has been approved by |
Suggest using a temporary variable to fix borrowck errors Fixes rust-lang#77834. In Rust, nesting method calls with both require `&mut` access to `self` produces a borrow-check error: error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time --> src/lib.rs:7:14 | 7 | self.foo(self.bar()); | ---------^^^^^^^^^^- | | | | | | | second mutable borrow occurs here | | first borrow later used by call | first mutable borrow occurs here That's because Rust has a left-to-right evaluation order, and the method receiver is passed first. Thus, the argument to the method cannot then mutate `self`. There's an easy solution to this error: just extract a local variable for the inner argument: let tmp = self.bar(); self.foo(tmp); However, the error doesn't give any suggestion of how to solve the problem. As a result, new users may assume that it's impossible to express their code correctly and get stuck. This commit adds a (non-structured) suggestion to extract a local variable for the inner argument to solve the error. The suggestion uses heuristics that eliminate most false positives, though there are a few false negatives (cases where the suggestion should be emitted but is not). Those other cases can be implemented in a future change.
Suggest using a temporary variable to fix borrowck errors Fixes rust-lang#77834. In Rust, nesting method calls with both require `&mut` access to `self` produces a borrow-check error: error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time --> src/lib.rs:7:14 | 7 | self.foo(self.bar()); | ---------^^^^^^^^^^- | | | | | | | second mutable borrow occurs here | | first borrow later used by call | first mutable borrow occurs here That's because Rust has a left-to-right evaluation order, and the method receiver is passed first. Thus, the argument to the method cannot then mutate `self`. There's an easy solution to this error: just extract a local variable for the inner argument: let tmp = self.bar(); self.foo(tmp); However, the error doesn't give any suggestion of how to solve the problem. As a result, new users may assume that it's impossible to express their code correctly and get stuck. This commit adds a (non-structured) suggestion to extract a local variable for the inner argument to solve the error. The suggestion uses heuristics that eliminate most false positives, though there are a few false negatives (cases where the suggestion should be emitted but is not). Those other cases can be implemented in a future change.
…askrgr Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#83174 (Suggest using a temporary variable to fix borrowck errors) - rust-lang#89734 (Point at capture points for non-`'static` reference crossing a `yield` point) - rust-lang#90270 (Make `Borrow` and `BorrowMut` impls `const`) - rust-lang#90741 (Const `Option::cloned`) - rust-lang#91548 (Add spin_loop hint for RISC-V architecture) - rust-lang#91721 (Minor improvements to `future::join!`'s implementation) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Fixes #77834.
In Rust, nesting method calls with both require
&mut
access toself
produces a borrow-check error:
That's because Rust has a left-to-right evaluation order, and the method
receiver is passed first. Thus, the argument to the method cannot then
mutate
self
.There's an easy solution to this error: just extract a local variable
for the inner argument:
However, the error doesn't give any suggestion of how to solve the
problem. As a result, new users may assume that it's impossible to
express their code correctly and get stuck.
This commit adds a (non-structured) suggestion to extract a local
variable for the inner argument to solve the error. The suggestion uses
heuristics that eliminate most false positives, though there are a few
false negatives (cases where the suggestion should be emitted but is
not). Those other cases can be implemented in a future change.