Use `Binder<Vec<Ty>>` instead of `Vec<Binder<Ty>>` in both solvers for sized/auto traits/etc.
It's more conceptually justified IMO, especially when binders get implications.
r? lcnr
A cycle was previously coinductive if all steps were coinductive.
Change this to instead considerm cycles to be coinductive if they
step through at least one where-bound of an impl of a coinductive
trait goal.
Use `edition = "2024"` in the compiler (redux)
Most of this is binding mode changes, which I fixed by running `x.py fix`.
Also adds some miscellaneous `unsafe` blocks for new unsafe standard library functions (the setenv ones), and a missing `unsafe extern` block in some enzyme codegen code, and fixes some precise capturing lifetime changes (but only when they led to errors).
cc ``@ehuss`` ``@traviscross``
Simplify slice indexing in next trait solver
Unless I'm missing something:
- no need to explicitly specify the end of the slice as the end of the index range
- the `assert` is redundant since the indexing will panic for the same condition
I think this change simplifies it a bit. Also replaced the `for` loop of `push`es with a call to `extend` with an iterator. Might improve performance since it knows how many elements will be added beforehand and can pre-reserve room?
r? `@compiler-errors` , I think
handle global trait bounds defining assoc types
This also fixes the compare-mode for
- tests/ui/coherence/coherent-due-to-fulfill.rs
- tests/ui/codegen/mono-impossible-2.rs
- tests/ui/trivial-bounds/trivial-bounds-inconsistent-projection.rs
- tests/ui/nll/issue-61320-normalize.rs
I first considered the alternative to always prefer where-bounds during normalization, regardless of how the trait goal has been proven by changing `fn merge_candidates` instead. ecda83b30f/compiler/rustc_next_trait_solver/src/solve/assembly/mod.rs (L785)
This approach is more restrictive than behavior of the old solver to avoid mismatches between trait and normalization goals. This may be breaking in case the where-bound adds unnecessary region constraints and we currently don't ever try to normalize an associated type. I would like to detect these cases and change the approach to exactly match the old solver if required. I want to minimize cases where attempting to normalize in more places causes code to break.
r? `@compiler-errors`
If a type has unsafe fields, its safety invariants are not simply
the conjunction of its field types' safety invariants. Consequently,
it's invalid to reason about the safety properties of these types
in a purely structural manner — i.e., the manner in which `auto`
traits are implemented.
Makes progress towards #132922.
