jiebi/CodeConvo huggingface dataset:
Code change:
<ins> // aux-build:issue-99221-aux.rs // build-aux-docs // ignore-cross-compile #![crate_name = "foo"] #[macro_use] extern crate issue_99221_aux; pub use issue_99221_aux::*; // @count foo/index.html '//a[@class="struct"][@title="foo::Print struct"]' 1 pub struct Print; </ins>

Related discussion:
text: I tried to create a minimum example from an issue we've seen in our project (). I tried running: On the following crate: : I expected to see this happen: The command should succeed. Instead, this happened: It crashed with an ICE <!-- If you're using the stable version of the compiler, you should also check if the bug also exists in the beta or nightly versions. --: <!-- Include a backtrace in the code block by setting in your environment. E.g. . --<details<summaryBacktrace</summary<p</p</details
This issue may be related to , however I can only reproduce it on the nightly build. On the stable channel, rustdoc succeeds.
cc
does this reproduce on beta?
I know I'm not celinval, but I've been able to reduce this to a test case, and yeah, it reproduces on beta.
That was quick. Thank you!
Reopening to track beta breakage.
I was silly and nominated even though the PR has already been nominated, and that's really the thing that's supposed to be. Please ignore, and sorry for the noise.
Code change:
fn stability(&self, def: DefId) -> Option<attr::Stability> { bug!("stability") } fn deprecation(&self, def: DefId) -> Option<attr::Deprecation> { bug!("deprecation") } fn visibility(&self, def: DefId) -> ty::Visibility { bug!("visibility") } <del> fn visible_parent_map<'a>(&'a self) -> ::std::cell::RefMut<'a, DefIdMap<DefId>> { </del> <ins> fn visible_parent_map<'a>(&'a self) -> ::std::cell::Ref<'a, DefIdMap<DefId>> { </ins> bug!("visible_parent_map") } fn item_generics_cloned(&self, def: DefId) -> ty::Generics

Related discussion:
text: I was going through some refactoring and the compiler exploded. No unsafe. The last bits of code I was playing with can be found , before I tried to refactor the example, the tests were building and passing. The macro that might be to blame is . I parked a branch with the code that made it blew up, you can find it here works, blows up. a happy compiler, worst case an unhappy one a dead compiler : Backtrace:
Minimal example:
Thanks that was a quick fix. Do you have a workaround until the fix makes it to master?
The ICE occurs when you have an item referenced in an impl signature is imported from an statement occurs within an impl. To work around the ICE, you can move the call to to a different free function.
Got it, it works , thanks!
Code change:
<ins> error[E0080]: evaluation of constant value failed --> $DIR/issue-88434-minimal-example.rs:10:5 | LL | const _CONST: &() = &f(&|_| {}); |                      ---------- inside `_CONST` at $DIR/issue-88434-minimal-example.rs:4:22 ... LL |     panic!() |     ^^^^^^^^ |     | |     the evaluated program panicked at 'explicit panic', $DIR/issue-88434-minimal-example.rs:10:5 |     inside `f::<[closure@$DIR/issue-88434-minimal-example.rs:4:25: 4:31]>` at $SRC_DIR/std/src/panic.rs:LL:COL | = note: this error originates in the macro `$crate::panic::panic_2015` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info) error: aborting due to previous error For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0080`. </ins>

Related discussion:
text: <!-- Thank you for finding an Internal Compiler Error! If possible, try to provide a minimal verifiable example. You can read "Rust Bug Minimization Patterns" for how to create smaller examples. --code from glacier <!-- If you're using the stable version of the compiler, you should also check if the bug also exists in the beta or nightly versions. --: <!-- Include a backtrace in the code block by setting in your environment. E.g. . --<details<summary<strongBacktrace</strong</summary<p</p</details<!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
This one also crashes beta and stable release channel.
Huh, why was this not detected earlier if it was tracked in glacier as fixed?
If you add a annotation to the trait bound on , then it no longer ICEs. Here's the code: Output: And if you add the two feature attributes the above messages ask you to enable, it still does not ICE, but correctly errors with "evaluation of constant value failed." Based on some debugging which I , I think this ICE has to do with the lifetime in the bound , although I'm not exactly sure how. I am new to the Rust compiler, and I just chose this issue because it seemed like a good first issue to work on, so I will read the (thanks to for sharing this) and try to further debug this.
If you plan to work on this issue, I recommend claiming it so other people know that and don't start working on it too. You can claim the issue by commenting with . More details about how to use rustbot are . You may also want to read the of the guide.
claim
Code change:
use crate::io::{self, BorrowedCursor, IoSlice, IoSliceMut, Read, Seek, SeekFrom, Write}; use crate::path::{Path, PathBuf}; use crate::sealed::Sealed; <ins> use crate::sync::Arc; </ins> use crate::sys::fs as fs_imp; use crate::sys_common::{AsInner, AsInnerMut, FromInner, IntoInner}; use crate::time::SystemTime;

Related discussion:
text: Some types ( and in particular) implement and on . If one of these types are wrapped in an (or ), there is no real reason why one shouldn't be able to call or methods on it. For example, this code should compile: I think this can be implemented pretty straightforwardly by adding the following impls to and : Are there good reasons for why impls like these shouldn't be ?
Closing because generic impls like proposed won't behave correctly, as described in .
Code change:
"test/bench/shootout-meteor.rs", # BSD "test/bench/shootout-pidigits.rs", # BSD "test/bench/shootout-regex-dna.rs", # BSD <ins> "test/bench/shootout-threadring.rs", # BSD </ins> ] def check_license(name, contents):

Related discussion:
text: See I propose to change the license of Non trivial contributors: OK OK OK Contributors appearing in git blame that are trivial (trivial update due to language changes): OK OK OK OK Contributors with removed and trivial contributions are not considered. For the persons that are not in "OK" state, please respond to this issue saying: Then, I'll propose the corresponding PR. Thanks.
I agree to relicense any previous contributions to according to the term of the Computer Language Benchmarks Game license ()
I agree to relicense any previous contributions to according to the term of the Computer Language Benchmarks Game license ()
Code change:
pub fn noop_fold_ty_binding<T: Folder>(b: TypeBinding, fld: &mut T) -> TypeBinding { TypeBinding { id: fld.new_id(b.id), <del> ident: b.ident, </del> <ins> ident: fld.fold_ident(b.ident), </ins> ty: fld.fold_ty(b.ty), span: fld.new_span(b.span), }

Related discussion:
text: Test case: Compiles successfully on , causes an ICE on . Diff contains only , CC Found while trying to minimize , but filed separately since the error message is different and this one has a small test case.
Do you have a backtrace?
Yes of course. Sorry I forgot to include it: rust error: internal compiler error: attempted .defid() on invalid def: Err note: the compiler unexpectedly panicked. this is a bug. note: we would appreciate a bug report: note: run with for a backtrace thread 'rustc' panicked at 'Box<Any',
Code change:
pub fn noop_fold_ty_binding<T: Folder>(b: TypeBinding, fld: &mut T) -> TypeBinding { TypeBinding { id: fld.new_id(b.id), <del> ident: b.ident, </del> <ins> ident: fld.fold_ident(b.ident), </ins> ty: fld.fold_ty(b.ty), span: fld.new_span(b.span), }

Related discussion:
text: stack backtrace: 1: 0x7fc35e73fdf3 - std::sys::imp::backtrace::tracing::imp::write::hdfa3e34b856f69a3 2: 0x7fc35e74e5dd - std::panicking::defaulthook::{{closure}}::h20f8c1082e0ce86e 3: 0x7fc35e74e17b - std::panicking::defaulthook::hd31552ac08c2a241 4: 0x7fc35e74ea68 - std::panicking::rustpanicwithhook::h73969d230a072c1a 5: 0x7fc357eda667 - std::panicking::beginpanic::hb89a2261f4776ce3 6: 0x7fc357eef99f - rustcerrors::Handler::bug::h13b3b29154320abd 7: 0x7fc35bab053a - rustc::session::optspanbugfmt::{{closure}}::hfea18dd68f59976d 8: 0x7fc35baafff7 - rustc::session::optspanbugfmt::h7d370a0810dbdbbd 9: 0x7fc35baafce2 - rustc::session::bugfmt::hcde5f50c54004a4f 10: 0x7fc35b984552 - rustc::hir::def::Def::defid::h728c22aafbe84efc 11: 0x7fc35c6ddb3a - rustcprivacy::ObsoleteVisiblePrivateTypesVisitor::pathisprivatetype::h24756a49a68d1da9 12: 0x7fc35c6d53db - rustc::hir::intravisit::walkty::h64b13c0c45b7a09a 13: 0x7fc35c6d49ba - rustc::hir::intravisit::Visitor::visitfn::ha8ad665c42b1d643 14: 0x7fc35c6de7cf - <rustcprivacy::ObsoleteVisiblePrivateTypesVisitor<'a,
Code change:
pub fn noop_fold_ty_binding<T: Folder>(b: TypeBinding, fld: &mut T) -> TypeBinding { TypeBinding { id: fld.new_id(b.id), <del> ident: b.ident, </del> <ins> ident: fld.fold_ident(b.ident), </ins> ty: fld.fold_ty(b.ty), span: fld.new_span(b.span), }

Related discussion:
text: 'tcxas rustc::hir::intravisit::Visitor<'tcx::visititem::hae9f32c7942ccca1 15: 0x7fc35c6deab5 - <rustcprivacy::ObsoleteVisiblePrivateTypesVisitor<'a, 'tcxas rustc::hir::intravisit::Visitor<'tcx::visititem::hae9f32c7942ccca1 16: 0x7fc35c6e1b7a - rustcprivacy::checkcrate::h5ba75e3c4ebe0690 17: 0x7fc35eaef747 - rustcdriver::driver::phase3runanalysispasses::{{closure}}::h388b9236cf305089 18: 0x7fc35ead66d6 - rustcdriver::driver::phase3runanalysispasses::h080c1a734c4f2909 19: 0x7fc35eac5425 - rustcdriver::driver::compileinput::hab55539b85c4ceed 20: 0x7fc35eb0ea51 - rustcdriver::runcompiler::h128b89b79f649304 21: 0x7fc35ea236fb - std::panicking::try::docall::h15bca94dda232804 22: 0x7fc35e757b06 - rustmaybecatchpanic 23: 0x7fc35ea44d01 - <F as alloc::boxed::FnBox<A::callbox::h8832766c4bda585b 24: 0x7fc35e74d470 - std::sys::imp::thread::Thread::new::threadstart::h7d03d727f96da002 25: 0x7fc357684453 - startthread 26: 0x7fc35e4147de - GI__clone 27: 0x0 - <unknown
triage: P-high Seems bad. Assigning to based on bisection.
Fixed in .
Code change:
pub fn noop_fold_ty_binding<T: Folder>(b: TypeBinding, fld: &mut T) -> TypeBinding { TypeBinding { id: fld.new_id(b.id), <del> ident: b.ident, </del> <ins> ident: fld.fold_ident(b.ident), </ins> ty: fld.fold_ty(b.ty), span: fld.new_span(b.span), }

Related discussion:
text: Servo compiles with rustc 2016-12-18, but not with 2016-12-21. Diff: The crate fails to build with: The method being called here is: Its return type is which is . This call is in another impl of the same method of the same trait: Adding an explicit type annotation works around this error, but only to uncover another very similar one, then another. The third one was in code generated by serde’s , so I gave up that approach. So far I haven’t managed to reduce a test case smaller than "most of Servo", sorry. I’m suspicious of (which is part of ) because it’s commit message mentions inference. I’m not building a compiler to confirm.
CC
Also fails in , so is not to blame. New diff: I don’t have another guess, and doing a full bisect would take a very long time…
I can't find the cause in that range, at least nothing changed in the compiler AFAICT. Can you try (the commit before larger rollup)?
Expanding the macro: (Even simplifying it, this is not using ) gives:
Alright, that matches what I've seen from What about a couple more steps of bisecting? Or maybe compiling this crate with the "servo" feature off (which, AFAICT, turns off all the macros 1.1 - they might be responsible).
Swapping the order of the two arms: Changing the pattern to : Hacking to not use the stable version of the compiler (so effectively disabling the feature and enabling the one) also gives the same error.
New range, based on manual bisect: good, bad. Diff: , which leaves only in-between. CC Also found more clues. More context for the code where the error happens: is a module generated by a macro, that contains re-exports of other modules: If I add a similar not in a macro: or if I change the original code to use the real path without going through a , this seems to work around this issue completely. … only to uncover another one:
Found another ICE, I don’t know if it’s related: .
Code change:
pub fn noop_fold_ty_binding<T: Folder>(b: TypeBinding, fld: &mut T) -> TypeBinding { TypeBinding { id: fld.new_id(b.id), <del> ident: b.ident, </del> <ins> ident: fld.fold_ident(b.ident), </ins> ty: fld.fold_ty(b.ty), span: fld.new_span(b.span), }

Related discussion:
text: Found a smaller test case for the inference issue: rust fn main() {} pub mod a { pub struct FontFamily; impl FontFamily { pub fn tocss(&self) -::std::fmt::Result { Ok(()) } } } macrorules! reexport { () ={ mod b { pub use a; } } } reexport!(); pub mod c { use b::a::FontFamily; struct FontFace { family: FontFamily } impl FontFace { pub fn tocss(&self) -::std::fmt::Result { try!(()); Ok(()) } } }
That "other ICE" is actually a direct observation of the bug, whereas this inference issue is some weird side-effect of the way we handle errors that don't stop compilation.
never mind, apparently it fails locally
triage: P-high Seems bad. Assigning to based on bisection.
Does this affect beta ()?
At the moment the latest successful nightly build is 3 days old. I don’t know how often playpen’s nigthly is updated. merged 2 days ago. (This is the rollup PR that merged , which introduced this issue if I did my manual bisecting correctly.) As far as I can tell no, is not reachable from and so beta is not affected.
Fixed in .
Code change:
// stream they came from. Here we attempt to extract these // lossless token streams before we fall back to the // stringification. <del> // // During early phases of the compiler, though, the AST could // get modified directly (e.g. attributes added or removed) and // the internal cache of tokens my not be invalidated or // updated. Consequently if the "lossless" token stream // disagrees with our actuall stringification (which has // historically been much more battle-tested) then we go with // the lossy stream anyway (losing span information). </del> let mut tokens = None; match nt.0 {

Related discussion:
text: This is minimized from the dramatic forum thread . The following code is fine in nightly-2018-04-12 but breaks with nightly-2018-04-15. Oddly, lots of minor perturbations make it succeed. For example remove the two characters and it works. Or remove the single quote in the string and it works.
Alrighty-roo. As everything these days with hygiene, there's a couple of bugs here. With this one though I think only two! Everything has to do here with basically. AKA anything that runs through that falls off The usual reasons we think you fall off the "happy path" are due to things like inner attributes, , macro expansion, etc. None of that's present here! It should be the case that above can be losslessly converted to a based on what we've cached. Turns out though had a bug in it (surprise surprise!). There we're using to compare the resulting two token streams which eventually bottoms out in . As it turns out this isn't quite what we want! The implementation is structural, but the token stream we get when stringifying is slightly different than what we parsed. Here in the example you're using the literal string , but rustc stringifies this token as . Similarly if you replaced the string with something like it'll be stringified as . This means that the tokens are not literally byte-for-byte equal, which means we fall off the happy path! tl;dr the token stream of is not equivalent to the token stream . This causes us to fall off the happy path and used a stringified token stream. OK so in the case above we're falling off the happy path when we didn't expect to, but even still there's some weird bad hygiene behavior when we're not on the happy path. There's still something to fix! It turns out that there's also a regression due to (found via bisection). Before that PR this example would compile just fine, afterwards though it's hitting this error. can you help diagnose this and see what's going on? The reduced test case I have right now is: (note the inner attribute on to force using a non-cached token stream)
I've posted a fix for the "happy path" at will actually fix example above.
Code change:
// stream they came from. Here we attempt to extract these // lossless token streams before we fall back to the // stringification. <del> // // During early phases of the compiler, though, the AST could // get modified directly (e.g. attributes added or removed) and // the internal cache of tokens my not be invalidated or // updated. Consequently if the "lossless" token stream // disagrees with our actuall stringification (which has // historically been much more battle-tested) then we go with // the lossy stream anyway (losing span information). </del> let mut tokens = None; match nt.0 {

Related discussion:
text: That PR does not, however, fix the regression from which is still reproducible with the example I gisted.
Any idea why my repro case above is fixed if you remove the tokens? It seems like should fall off the happy path just as much.
If you remove the tokens we're still on the stringification path (aka not the happy path). For whatever reason though the hygiene bug goes away. That's likely caused from a subtelty introduced in (or at least so I'm hoping). I don't know much about , so I'm hoping will be able to look at this and know what's going on!
I don't know much about , so I'm hoping will be able to look at this and know what's going on! I'll investigate.
is the commit causing the regression. Further investigation is in progress.
An issue recently popped up on Rocket () that appears to be identical to this one and is not resolved in any recent nightly. It's possible that the root cause is , however.
Code change:
<ins> // Copyright 2017 The Rust Project Developers. See the COPYRIGHT // file at the top-level directory of this distribution and at // http://rust-lang.org/COPYRIGHT. // // Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 <LICENSE-APACHE or // http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0> or the MIT license // <LICENSE-MIT or http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT>, at your // option. This file may not be copied, modified, or distributed // except according to those terms. // Issue 33903: // Built-in indexing should be used even when the index is not // trivially an integer // Only built-in indexing can be used in constant expresssions const FOO: i32 = [12, 34][0 + 1]; fn main() {} </ins>

Related discussion:
text: Hello, today we've found some weird behaviour of array indexing. Here is the Code snippet: The question is, why is the indexing operator behaves depending on whether we evaluate in place or not.
Highly related question :
Moreover, does not compile too.
points to this being a difference in how builtin indexing works vs overloaded indexing. My cleaned up version of the transcript: Highly related to , which will cause these types of situations to occur more frequently.
As a workaround, you can write an explicit type of which will then allow builtin indexing to happen:
Code change:
<ins> // Copyright 2017 The Rust Project Developers. See the COPYRIGHT // file at the top-level directory of this distribution and at // http://rust-lang.org/COPYRIGHT. // // Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 <LICENSE-APACHE or // http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0> or the MIT license // <LICENSE-MIT or http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT>, at your // option. This file may not be copied, modified, or distributed // except according to those terms. // Issue 33903: // Built-in indexing should be used even when the index is not // trivially an integer // Only built-in indexing can be used in constant expresssions const FOO: i32 = [12, 34][0 + 1]; fn main() {} </ins>

Related discussion:
text: It appears that when it's not obvious the index type is , we fall back to overloaded indexing: Fails in constant checking, : And also with the new MIR-based constant checker, :
Code change:
panic!(); } } <ins> #[test] fn test_issue_82291() { use std::cell::Cell; let mut v1 = [()]; let v2 = [()]; let called = Cell::new(0); let mut zip = v1 .iter_mut() .map(|r| { called.set(called.get() + 1); r }) .zip(&v2); zip.next_back(); assert_eq!(called.get(), 1); zip.next(); assert_eq!(called.get(), 1); } </ins>

Related discussion:
text: Here is called for potential side effects until , ignoring however that it could have already been called in with those indexes. that demonstrates how this can be exploited to get two mutable references to the same data and cause an use-after-free bug.
Assigning as part of the .
The gift that keeps on giving Maybe it is time to get rid of as it exists today and replace it with a ? One that imposes the additional requirement on the caller that it must bring the iterator back into a safe state after it is done iterating. The upside would be eliminating a lot of code in and enabling the same optimization for and similar sources. While the downside would be that external iteration (i.e. loops and manual calls to ) would cease to benefit from optimizations and only internal iteration methods (including ) would continue to do so.
I don't know, I feel like that would just make more complex to upheld the invariants. IMO a good improvement over the current would be separating forward and backward iteration, this way it becomes easier to keep track of the state and I think would also make it possible to implement them for
I don't see how separating the forward and backward state would help with a drop implementation. The issue is that the source () currently does not have access to that state, instead the consumer drives the iteration by direct access through and never informs the source about it.
It would help because it allows the source iterator to keep track of its state by updating it when the method is called. Anyway, looks like someone already and it resulted in worse optimizations, but maybe LLVM got better in the meantime, or maybe that implementation could have been better. Anyway I don't think this is the right place to discuss this, a topic on zulip would probably be better.
https://rust-
Code change:
<ins> #![allow(bare_trait_objects)] // check-pass pub struct FormatWith<'a, I, F> { sep: &'a str, /// FormatWith uses interior mutability because Display::fmt takes &self. inner: RefCell<Option<(I, F)>>, } use std::cell::RefCell; use std::fmt; struct Layout; pub fn new_format<'a, I, F>(iter: I, separator: &'a str, f: F) -> FormatWith<'a, I, F> where I: Iterator, F: FnMut(I::Item, &mut FnMut(&fmt::Display) -> fmt::Result) -> fmt::Result, { FormatWith { sep: separator, inner: RefCell::new(Some((iter, f))) } } fn main() { let _ = new_format(0..32, " | ", |i, f| f(&format_args!("0x{:x}", i))); } </ins>

Related discussion:
text: <!-- Thank you for filing a regression report! A regression is something that changed between versions of Rust but was not supposed to. Please provide a short summary of the regression, along with any information you feel is relevant to replicate it. --I tried this code with : I expected to see only warning without error, like this: Instead, this happened (extra error E0521 emitted, which is incorrect): If I add in line 3, it compiles without any error or warning: So the E0521 error emitted by the compiler is incorrect. The test code using should only produce warnings without an error. It most recently worked on: 1.63.0-nightly ( 2022-05-18) </p</details<!-- If you know when this regression occurred, please add a line like below, replacing with one of stable, beta, or nightly. modify labels: +regression-from-stable-to-{channel} -regression-untriaged --
labels:+T-compiler
label A-diagnostics
labels: +regression-from-stable-to-nightly
label -regression-untriaged Bisection: regressed nightly: nightly-2022-06-23 searched commit range: regressed commit: that’s , cc
Seems like, possibly, the code without the explicit (incorrectly) desugars to rather than Edit: Or perhaps it incorrectly desugars to
Here’s another kind of code example that reproduces the issue Which does confirm the idea that this appears to be interpreted like , rather than which would be correct.
WG-prioritization assigning priority (). label -I-prioritize +P-critical