Permit Coercions in Type Ascriptions#79730
Closed
b-naber wants to merge 3 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
Closed
Conversation
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We want to permit coercions of type ascriptions inside coercion sites. To implement this we introduce a
TypeAscriptionCtxt, which we pass inside anExpectationdown to sub-expressions. Once we encounter a coercion site, we set TypeAscriptionCtxt::Coercion in the Expectation and propagate this down intocheck_expr_with_expectation. Whenever we encounter a type ascription and TypeAscriptionCtxt::Coercion is set, we coerce the type ascription.Since not all sites, in which
check_expr_coercable_to_typecalls originate, are coercion sites (e.g. ExprKind::Assign or some methods in op.rs usecheck_expr_coercable_to_type), we currently also pass a TypeAscriptionCtxt tocheck_expr_coercable_to_type. Exposing TypeAscriptionCtxt throughout typeck::check is probably bad, I'm not sure what's the best way to hide the Ctxt, maybe we could call different variants of 'check_expr_coercable_to_type' based on whether the site at which these calls originate is an actual coercion site or not?Closes #78248
r? @nikomatsakis