Record certainty of evaluate_added_goals_and_make_canonical_response call in candidate
This commit is contained in:
parent
61a1dbd751
commit
17728a9bb2
5 changed files with 49 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ impl<'tcx> EvalCtxt<'_, 'tcx> {
|
|||
previous call to `try_evaluate_added_goals!`"
|
||||
);
|
||||
|
||||
self.inspect.make_canonical_response(certainty);
|
||||
|
||||
// When normalizing, we've replaced the expected term with an unconstrained
|
||||
// inference variable. This means that we dropped information which could
|
||||
// have been important. We handle this by instead returning the nested goals
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ pub struct InspectCandidate<'a, 'tcx> {
|
|||
nested_goals: Vec<inspect::CanonicalState<'tcx, Goal<'tcx, ty::Predicate<'tcx>>>>,
|
||||
final_state: inspect::CanonicalState<'tcx, ()>,
|
||||
result: QueryResult<'tcx>,
|
||||
candidate_certainty: Option<Certainty>,
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
impl<'a, 'tcx> InspectCandidate<'a, 'tcx> {
|
||||
|
@ -56,6 +57,19 @@ impl<'a, 'tcx> InspectCandidate<'a, 'tcx> {
|
|||
self.result.map(|c| c.value.certainty)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/// Certainty passed into `evaluate_added_goals_and_make_canonical_response`.
|
||||
///
|
||||
/// If this certainty is `Some(Yes)`, then we must be confident that the candidate
|
||||
/// must hold iff it's nested goals hold. This is not true if the certainty is
|
||||
/// `Some(Maybe)`, which suggests we forced ambiguity instead, or if it is `None`,
|
||||
/// which suggests we may have not assembled any candidates at all.
|
||||
///
|
||||
/// This is *not* the certainty of the candidate's nested evaluation, which can be
|
||||
/// accessed with [`Self::result`] instead.
|
||||
pub fn candidate_certainty(&self) -> Option<Certainty> {
|
||||
self.candidate_certainty
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/// Visit all nested goals of this candidate without rolling
|
||||
/// back their inference constraints. This function modifies
|
||||
/// the state of the `infcx`.
|
||||
|
@ -160,7 +174,9 @@ impl<'a, 'tcx> InspectGoal<'a, 'tcx> {
|
|||
nested_goals: &mut Vec<inspect::CanonicalState<'tcx, Goal<'tcx, ty::Predicate<'tcx>>>>,
|
||||
probe: &inspect::Probe<'tcx>,
|
||||
) {
|
||||
let mut candidate_certainty = None;
|
||||
let num_candidates = candidates.len();
|
||||
|
||||
for step in &probe.steps {
|
||||
match step {
|
||||
&inspect::ProbeStep::AddGoal(_source, goal) => nested_goals.push(goal),
|
||||
|
@ -172,6 +188,9 @@ impl<'a, 'tcx> InspectGoal<'a, 'tcx> {
|
|||
self.candidates_recur(candidates, nested_goals, probe);
|
||||
nested_goals.truncate(num_goals);
|
||||
}
|
||||
inspect::ProbeStep::MakeCanonicalResponse { shallow_certainty } => {
|
||||
assert_eq!(candidate_certainty.replace(*shallow_certainty), None);
|
||||
}
|
||||
inspect::ProbeStep::EvaluateGoals(_) => (),
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
@ -195,6 +214,7 @@ impl<'a, 'tcx> InspectGoal<'a, 'tcx> {
|
|||
nested_goals: nested_goals.clone(),
|
||||
final_state: probe.final_state,
|
||||
result,
|
||||
candidate_certainty,
|
||||
})
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
@ -206,6 +226,7 @@ impl<'a, 'tcx> InspectGoal<'a, 'tcx> {
|
|||
nested_goals: nested_goals.clone(),
|
||||
final_state: probe.final_state,
|
||||
result,
|
||||
candidate_certainty,
|
||||
});
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -241,6 +241,7 @@ enum WipProbeStep<'tcx> {
|
|||
AddGoal(GoalSource, inspect::CanonicalState<'tcx, Goal<'tcx, ty::Predicate<'tcx>>>),
|
||||
EvaluateGoals(WipAddedGoalsEvaluation<'tcx>),
|
||||
NestedProbe(WipProbe<'tcx>),
|
||||
MakeCanonicalResponse { shallow_certainty: Certainty },
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
impl<'tcx> WipProbeStep<'tcx> {
|
||||
|
@ -249,6 +250,9 @@ impl<'tcx> WipProbeStep<'tcx> {
|
|||
WipProbeStep::AddGoal(source, goal) => inspect::ProbeStep::AddGoal(source, goal),
|
||||
WipProbeStep::EvaluateGoals(eval) => inspect::ProbeStep::EvaluateGoals(eval.finalize()),
|
||||
WipProbeStep::NestedProbe(probe) => inspect::ProbeStep::NestedProbe(probe.finalize()),
|
||||
WipProbeStep::MakeCanonicalResponse { shallow_certainty } => {
|
||||
inspect::ProbeStep::MakeCanonicalResponse { shallow_certainty }
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
@ -530,6 +534,19 @@ impl<'tcx> ProofTreeBuilder<'tcx> {
|
|||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
pub fn make_canonical_response(&mut self, shallow_certainty: Certainty) {
|
||||
match self.as_mut() {
|
||||
Some(DebugSolver::GoalEvaluationStep(state)) => {
|
||||
state
|
||||
.current_evaluation_scope()
|
||||
.steps
|
||||
.push(WipProbeStep::MakeCanonicalResponse { shallow_certainty });
|
||||
}
|
||||
None => {}
|
||||
_ => {}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
pub fn finish_probe(mut self) -> ProofTreeBuilder<'tcx> {
|
||||
match self.as_mut() {
|
||||
None => {}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue