Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label #90709

estebank · 2021-11-08T19:16:15Z

When we point at a binding to suggest giving it a type, erase all the
type for ADTs that have been resolved, leaving only the ones that could
not be inferred. For small shallow types this is not a problem, but for
big nested types with lots of params, this can otherwise cause a lot of
unnecessary visual output.

rust-highfive · 2021-11-08T19:16:18Z

r? @nagisa

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

sanxiyn · 2021-11-18T02:53:04Z

compiler/rustc_infer/src/infer/error_reporting/need_type_info.rs

+                            // Replace not yet inferred const params with their def name.
+                            self.tcx().mk_const_param(0, Symbol::intern("N"), c.ty).into()


Is this comment correct?

nagisa

A test where multiple parameters are not inferred would be nice too. Of particular interest would be a function that returns an array where both the value type and const length could not be inferred.

compiler/rustc_infer/src/infer/error_reporting/need_type_info.rs

nagisa · 2021-11-19T00:09:27Z

compiler/rustc_infer/src/infer/error_reporting/need_type_info.rs

+            ty::Infer(_) => t,
+            // We don't want to hide the outermost type, only its type params.
+            _ if self.level == 1 => t.super_fold_with(self),
+            // Hide this type


I'm slightly worried about the handling of ty::Errors that come in as part of the input as they become indistinguishable from those that are produced by this TypeFolder, but its probably fine…

I would think that any naturally ocurring ty::Error should be displayed as _ anyways. Worst case scenario on the next wave of errors the user will be told to fill it in.

compiler/rustc_infer/src/infer/error_reporting/need_type_info.rs

estebank · 2021-11-19T06:11:39Z

src/test/ui/inference/erase-type-params-in-label.stderr

+help: consider specifying the type arguments in the function call
+   |
+LL |     let foo = foo::<T, K, W, Z>(1, "");
+   |                  ++++++++++++++


Outstanding: changing this to also use _ for the first two params here. Can be done as a follow up.

bors · 2021-11-22T00:57:15Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #90352) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

nagisa · 2021-11-27T22:41:49Z

@bors r+

estebank · 2021-11-29T21:10:22Z

@bors r=nagisa

The bot seems to have been taking a nap.

bors · 2021-11-29T21:10:24Z

📌 Commit e462819 has been approved by nagisa

…=nagisa Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label When we point at a binding to suggest giving it a type, erase all the type for ADTs that have been resolved, leaving only the ones that could not be inferred. For small shallow types this is not a problem, but for big nested types with lots of params, this can otherwise cause a lot of unnecessary visual output.

matthiaskrgr · 2021-12-01T04:33:27Z

Failed in a rollup, maybe just needs a small rebase and fixup..?
#91413 (comment)
@bors r- rollup=iffy

estebank · 2021-12-02T21:04:56Z

@bors r=nagisa

bors · 2021-12-03T23:41:48Z

⌛ Testing commit b988151 with merge 21f0c7aafcdf0c6622a2f03305a57efcfb2cbf79...

bors · 2021-12-03T23:46:47Z

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

bors · 2021-12-05T04:10:42Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #91539) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

When we point at a binding to suggest giving it a type, erase all the type for ADTs that have been resolved, leaving only the ones that could not be inferred. For small shallow types this is not a problem, but for big nested types with lots of params, this can otherwise cause a lot of unnecessary visual output.

When the value of a const param isn't inferred, replace it with the param name from the definition.

estebank · 2021-12-07T02:19:39Z

@bors r=nagisa

bors · 2021-12-07T02:19:47Z

📌 Commit 7271d1f has been approved by nagisa

…=nagisa Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label When we point at a binding to suggest giving it a type, erase all the type for ADTs that have been resolved, leaving only the ones that could not be inferred. For small shallow types this is not a problem, but for big nested types with lots of params, this can otherwise cause a lot of unnecessary visual output.

…askrgr Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#90709 (Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label) - rust-lang#91551 (Allow for failure of subst_normalize_erasing_regions in const_eval) - rust-lang#91570 (Evaluate inline const pat early and report error if too generic) - rust-lang#91571 (Remove unneeded access to pretty printer's `s` field in favor of deref) - rust-lang#91610 (Link to rustdoc_json_types docs instead of rustdoc-json RFC) - rust-lang#91619 (Update cargo) - rust-lang#91630 (Add missing whitespace before disabled HTML attribute) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

…=nagisa Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label When we point at a binding to suggest giving it a type, erase all the type for ADTs that have been resolved, leaving only the ones that could not be inferred. For small shallow types this is not a problem, but for big nested types with lots of params, this can otherwise cause a lot of unnecessary visual output.

rust-highfive assigned nagisa Nov 8, 2021

rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Nov 8, 2021

apiraino added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Nov 11, 2021

sanxiyn reviewed Nov 18, 2021

View reviewed changes

nagisa reviewed Nov 19, 2021

View reviewed changes

nagisa 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-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Nov 19, 2021

estebank force-pushed the erase-known-type-params branch 2 times, most recently from 5c807b1 to 0f668ff Compare November 19, 2021 05:56

estebank added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Nov 19, 2021

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

estebank commented Nov 19, 2021

View reviewed changes

estebank force-pushed the erase-known-type-params branch from 3ce5b5e to e462819 Compare November 22, 2021 18:58

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 Nov 29, 2021

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Nov 30, 2021

Rollup of 11 pull requests #91382

Closed

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 1, 2021

Rollup of 6 pull requests #91413

Closed

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 Dec 1, 2021

estebank force-pushed the erase-known-type-params branch from e462819 to b988151 Compare December 2, 2021 21:04

bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Dec 3, 2021

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

estebank added 4 commits December 7, 2021 02:05

Refer to uninferred const params by their name, instead of { _: _ }

3fd15c8

When the value of a const param isn't inferred, replace it with the param name from the definition.

Refer to const params as "const params" and not "type params"

6a691b1

Add test with multiple type params failing inference

7271d1f

estebank force-pushed the erase-known-type-params branch from b988151 to 7271d1f Compare December 7, 2021 02:19

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 Dec 7, 2021

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 8, 2021

Rollup of 14 pull requests #91650

Closed

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 8, 2021

Rollup of 12 pull requests #91658

Closed

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 8, 2021

Rollup of 8 pull requests #91664

Closed

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 8, 2021

Rollup of 7 pull requests #91665

Merged

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 8, 2021

Rollup of 6 pull requests #91670

Closed

bors merged commit 7970fab into rust-lang:master Dec 8, 2021

rustbot added this to the 1.59.0 milestone Dec 8, 2021

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label #90709

Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label #90709

estebank commented Nov 8, 2021

rust-highfive commented Nov 8, 2021

sanxiyn Nov 18, 2021

nagisa left a comment

nagisa Nov 19, 2021

estebank Nov 19, 2021

This comment has been minimized.

estebank Nov 19, 2021

bors commented Nov 22, 2021

nagisa commented Nov 27, 2021

estebank commented Nov 29, 2021

bors commented Nov 29, 2021

matthiaskrgr commented Dec 1, 2021

estebank commented Dec 2, 2021

bors commented Dec 3, 2021

bors commented Dec 3, 2021

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Dec 5, 2021

estebank commented Dec 7, 2021

bors commented Dec 7, 2021

		// Replace not yet inferred const params with their def name.
		self.tcx().mk_const_param(0, Symbol::intern("N"), c.ty).into()

Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label #90709

Only shown relevant type params in E0283 label #90709

Conversation

estebank commented Nov 8, 2021

rust-highfive commented Nov 8, 2021

sanxiyn Nov 18, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nagisa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nagisa Nov 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

estebank Nov 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

This comment has been minimized.

estebank Nov 19, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bors commented Nov 22, 2021

nagisa commented Nov 27, 2021

estebank commented Nov 29, 2021

bors commented Nov 29, 2021

matthiaskrgr commented Dec 1, 2021

estebank commented Dec 2, 2021

bors commented Dec 3, 2021

bors commented Dec 3, 2021

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Dec 5, 2021

estebank commented Dec 7, 2021

bors commented Dec 7, 2021