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

Cannot use visibility modified in associated item declared inside const argument. #89342

Closed
rodrimati1992 opened this issue Sep 28, 2021 · 0 comments · Fixed by #122004
Closed
Assignees
Labels
A-associated-items Area: Associated items (types, constants & functions) C-bug Category: This is a bug. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@rodrimati1992
Copy link
Contributor

rodrimati1992 commented Sep 28, 2021

I tried this code:

struct Foo;

impl Default for Foo 
where
    [(); {
        impl Foo {
            pub const X: Self = Self;
        }
        0
    }]:
{
    fn default() -> Self {
        Self::X
    }
}

I expected the code to compile

Instead, the compiler errored with this message:

error[E0449]: unnecessary visibility qualifier
 --> src/main.rs:7:13
  |
7 |             pub const X: Self = Self;
  |             ^^^ `pub` not permitted here because it's implied

Meta

rustc --version --verbose:

rustc 1.57.0-nightly (98c861950 2021-09-27)
binary: rustc
commit-hash: 98c8619502093f34ca82f8f26ccf32e753924440
commit-date: 2021-09-27
host: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
release: 1.57.0-nightly
LLVM version: 13.0.0
@rodrimati1992 rodrimati1992 added the C-bug Category: This is a bug. label Sep 28, 2021
@ChrisDenton ChrisDenton added the needs-triage-legacy Old issue that were never triaged. Remove this label once the issue has been sufficiently triaged. label Jul 16, 2023
@fmease fmease added T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. and removed needs-triage-legacy Old issue that were never triaged. Remove this label once the issue has been sufficiently triaged. labels Jan 23, 2024
@fmease fmease self-assigned this Jan 23, 2024
@fmease fmease added the A-associated-items Area: Associated items (types, constants & functions) label Jan 26, 2024
@bors bors closed this as completed in 2e3bde2 Mar 8, 2024
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this issue Mar 8, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#122004 - fmease:astvalidator-min-fix, r=compiler-errors

AST validation: Improve handling of inherent impls nested within functions and anon consts

Minimal fix for issue rust-lang#121607 extracted from PR rust-lang#120698 for ease of backporting and since I'd like to improve PR rust-lang#120698 in such a way that it makes AST validator truly robust against such sort of regressions (AST validator is generally *beyond* footgun-y atm). The current version of PR rust-lang#120698 sort of does that already but there's still room for improvement.

Fixes rust-lang#89342.
Fixes [after beta-backport] rust-lang#121607.
Partially addresses rust-lang#119924 (rust-lang#120698 aims to fully fix it).

---

### Explainer

The last commit of PR rust-lang#119505 regressed issue rust-lang#121607.

Previously we would reject visibilities on associated items with `visibility_not_permitted` if we were in a trait (by checking the parameter `ctxt` of `visit_assoc_item` which was 100% accurate) or if we were in a trait impl (by checking a flag called `in_trait_impl` tracked in `AstValidator` which was/is only accurate if the visitor methods correctly updated it which isn't actually the case giving rise to the old open issue rust-lang#89342).

In PR rust-lang#119505, I moved even more state into the `AstValidator` by generalizing the flag `in_trait_impl` to `trait_or_trait_impl` to be able to report more precise diagnostics (modeling *Trait | TraitImpl*). However since we/I didn't update `trait_or_trait_impl` in all places to reflect reality (similar to us not updating `in_trait_impl` before), this lead to rust-lang#121607 (comment) getting wrongfully rejected. Since PR rust-lang#119505 we reject visibilities if the “globally tracked” (wrt. to `AstValidator`) `outer_trait_or_trait_impl` is `Some`.

Crucially, when visiting an inherent impl, I never reset `outer_trait_or_trait_impl` back to `None` leading us to believe that `bar` in the stack [`trait Foo` > `fn foo` > `impl Bar` > `pub fn bar`] (from the MCVE) was an inherent associated item (we saw `trait Foo` but not `impl Bar` before it).

The old open issue rust-lang#89342 is caused by the aforementioned issue of us never updating `in_trait_impl` prior to my PR rust-lang#119505 / `outer_trait_or_trait` after my PR. Stack: [`impl Default for Foo` > `{` > `impl Foo` > `pub const X`] (we only saw `impl Default for Foo` but not the `impl Foo` before it).

---

This PR is only meant to be a *hot fix*. I plan on completely *rewriting* `AstValidator` from the ground up to not rely on “globally tracked” state like this or at least make it close to impossible to forget updating it when descending into nested items (etc.). Other visitors do a way better job at that (e.g. AST lowering). I actually plan on experimenting with moving more and more logic from `AstValidator` into the AST lowering pass/stage/visitor to follow the [Parse, don't validate](https://lexi-lambda.github.io/blog/2019/11/05/parse-don-t-validate/) “pattern”.

---

r? `@compiler-errors`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-associated-items Area: Associated items (types, constants & functions) C-bug Category: This is a bug. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
3 participants