refining_impl_trait
only fires on public traits
#119535
Labels
A-lints
Area: Lints (warnings about flaws in source code) such as unused_mut.
A-trait-system
Area: Trait system
F-refine
`#![feature(refine)]`; RFC #3245
F-return_position_impl_trait_in_trait
`#![feature(return_position_impl_trait_in_trait)]`
T-lang
Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
The
refining_impl_trait
lint only fires for public traits. It does not fire without thepub
keyword in the code sample below:Difference from
async_fn_in_trait
lintApparently I was part of the discussion of this at one point (see also the zulip topic on this). I think it got lumped together with the discussion about the lint for
async fn
in traits, though, when there are some important distinctions:async fn
lint is only temporary to help avoid footguns created by missing language features, and we want to make non-footgunny uses more convenient.The second point is important, because as a user I would expect such a fundamental mechanism to behave independently of whether the trait happens to be crate-public or not. This can lead to false expectations being created about the behavior in the other case.
Violating abstraction boundaries within a crate
As an example of the last point, let's say I as a user want to define a trait that my type implements ahead of actually generalizing my code:
Later on, I want to write a test for
all_windows
. But in order to do that, I have to change it to acceptimpl Application
, which requires changing the output type toimpl Window + '_
, and possibly changing all the users ofall_windows
as well. This can get unwieldy quick.We can say that the user should have used
impl Trait
from the beginning, but that might be inconvenient when prototyping. If they are leaning on traits to provide the outlines of an abstraction boundary, we should let them opt in before punching through said boundary, IMO.cc @compiler-errors
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: