jiebi/CodeConvo huggingface dataset:
Code change:
Currently all of its functions immediately . We need to either remove this or implement it. I vote for implementing it.

Related discussion:
text: } #[test] <ins> fn test_buf_writer() { let mut buf = [0 as u8, ..8]; { let mut writer = BufWriter::new(buf); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 0); writer.write([0]); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 1); writer.write([1, 2, 3]); writer.write([4, 5, 6, 7]); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 8); } assert_eq!(buf, [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]); } #[test] fn test_buf_writer_seek() { let mut buf = [0 as u8, ..8]; { let mut writer = BufWriter::new(buf); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 0); writer.write([1]); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 1); writer.seek(2, SeekSet); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 2); writer.write([2]); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 3); writer.seek(-2, SeekCur); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 1); writer.write([3]); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 2); writer.seek(-1, SeekEnd); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 7); writer.write([4]); assert_eq!(writer.tell(), 8); } assert_eq!(buf, [1, 3, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 4]); } #[test] fn test_buf_writer_error() { let mut buf = [0 as u8, ..2]; let mut writer = BufWriter::new(buf); writer.write([0]); let mut called = false; do io_error::cond.trap(|err| { assert_eq!(err.kind, OtherIoError); called = true; }).inside { writer.write([0, 0]); } assert!(called); } #[test] </ins> fn test_mem_reader() { let mut reader = MemReader::new(~[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]); let mut buf = [];
Code change:
<!-- 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. --: : &lt;!-- Include a backtrace in the code block by setting in your environment. E.g. . --&lt;details&lt;summary&lt;strongBacktrace&lt;/strong&lt;/summary&lt;p&lt;/p&lt;/details&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
The real error isn't the unemitted diagnostic, it's the unwrap. The unemitted diagnostic only happens bc this unwrap occurs during diagnostics code, I think.
cc I think this might be and we try to suggest .clone() which is not available for the type though?
If you add ... to the example you no longer ICE and just hit the normalerror[E0382]: use of moved value: 'x' `
claim
Please use this minimized repro:

Every time I think "surely this will be fine", it bites me in the read as sure as the sun coming up.
Are we fixing ICEs? Not so sure we should bother...
This one was particularly easy to fix () and probably shouldn't've have been an in the first place (unwraps in diagnostics code are generally a code smell, since they should fail gracefully in strange situations) -- but I generally agree, had this fix required some large refactoring or implemented extra checks on a performance-sensitive path, then I think this should've been closed w/ a wontfix.

Related discussion:
text: let tcx = self.infcx.tcx; // Try to find predicates on *generic params* that would allow copying `ty` let infcx = tcx.infer_ctxt().build(); <del> if infcx .type_implements_trait( tcx.lang_items().clone_trait().unwrap(), [tcx.erase_regions(ty)], self.param_env, ) .must_apply_modulo_regions() </del> <ins> if let Some(clone_trait_def) = tcx.lang_items().clone_trait() && infcx .type_implements_trait( clone_trait_def, [tcx.erase_regions(ty)], self.param_env, ) .must_apply_modulo_regions() </ins> { err.span_suggestion_verbose( span.shrink_to_hi(),
Code change:
<!-- 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. --: : &lt;!-- Include a backtrace in the code block by setting in your environment. E.g. . --&lt;details&lt;summary&lt;strongBacktrace&lt;/strong&lt;/summary&lt;p&lt;/p&lt;/details&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
The real error isn't the unemitted diagnostic, it's the unwrap. The unemitted diagnostic only happens bc this unwrap occurs during diagnostics code, I think.
cc I think this might be and we try to suggest .clone() which is not available for the type though?
If you add ... to the example you no longer ICE and just hit the normalerror[E0382]: use of moved value: 'x' `
claim
Please use this minimized repro:

Every time I think "surely this will be fine", it bites me in the read as sure as the sun coming up.
Are we fixing ICEs? Not so sure we should bother...
This one was particularly easy to fix () and probably shouldn't've have been an in the first place (unwraps in diagnostics code are generally a code smell, since they should fail gracefully in strange situations) -- but I generally agree, had this fix required some large refactoring or implemented extra checks on a performance-sensitive path, then I think this should've been closed w/ a wontfix.

Related discussion:
text: <ins> // Avoid panicking if the Clone trait is not found while building error suggestions // See #104870 #![feature(no_core, lang_items)] #![no_core] #[lang = "sized"] trait Sized {} #[lang = "copy"] trait Copy {} fn g<T>(x: T) {} fn f(x: *mut u8) { g(x); g(x); //~ ERROR use of moved value: `x` } fn main() {} </ins>
Code change:
<!-- 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. --: : &lt;!-- Include a backtrace in the code block by setting in your environment. E.g. . --&lt;details&lt;summary&lt;strongBacktrace&lt;/strong&lt;/summary&lt;p&lt;/p&lt;/details&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --&lt;!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
The real error isn't the unemitted diagnostic, it's the unwrap. The unemitted diagnostic only happens bc this unwrap occurs during diagnostics code, I think.
cc I think this might be and we try to suggest .clone() which is not available for the type though?
If you add ... to the example you no longer ICE and just hit the normalerror[E0382]: use of moved value: 'x' `
claim
Please use this minimized repro:

Every time I think "surely this will be fine", it bites me in the read as sure as the sun coming up.
Are we fixing ICEs? Not so sure we should bother...
This one was particularly easy to fix () and probably shouldn't've have been an in the first place (unwraps in diagnostics code are generally a code smell, since they should fail gracefully in strange situations) -- but I generally agree, had this fix required some large refactoring or implemented extra checks on a performance-sensitive path, then I think this should've been closed w/ a wontfix.

Related discussion:
text: <ins> error[E0382]: use of moved value: `x` --> $DIR/missing-clone-for-suggestion.rs:17:7 | LL | fn f(x: *mut u8) { |      - move occurs because `x` has type `*mut u8`, which does not implement the `Copy` trait LL |     g(x); |       - value moved here LL |     g(x); |       ^ value used here after move | note: consider changing this parameter type in function `g` to borrow instead if owning the value isn't necessary --> $DIR/missing-clone-for-suggestion.rs:13:12 | LL | fn g<T>(x: T) {} |    -       ^ this parameter takes ownership of the value |    | |    in this function error: aborting due to previous error For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0382`. </ins>
Code change:
Given the following code: current output is: The last part of the suggestion is not valid Rust code and therefore should not be suggested like this. This problem occurs on the Playground on both stable and nightly with basically identical error messages. serde v1.0.147 requires such that will be . Otherwise the problem does not seem serde specific. <!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
claim
do you know how to create a minimal case without ? so we may add it to unit testing. I give a fix and verified it's OK with my local testing, but I'm struggle to construct a minimal case without to reproduce it.
I assume this reproduces when using the same setup of derive macro implementing a trait while the implementation is missing bounds. I don't know if it is relevant that the derive macro produces a trait. Something along these lines, with the proc macro crate omitted.
yes, it's caused by derive macro.
emmmet this error

Related discussion:
text: )); } <ins> // FIXME: remove the suggestions that are from derive, as the span is not correct suggestions = suggestions .into_iter() .filter(|(span, _, _)| !span.in_derive_expansion()) .collect::<Vec<_>>(); </ins> if suggestions.len() == 1 { let (span, suggestion, msg) = suggestions.pop().unwrap();
Code change:
Given the following code: current output is: The last part of the suggestion is not valid Rust code and therefore should not be suggested like this. This problem occurs on the Playground on both stable and nightly with basically identical error messages. serde v1.0.147 requires such that will be . Otherwise the problem does not seem serde specific. <!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
claim
do you know how to create a minimal case without ? so we may add it to unit testing. I give a fix and verified it's OK with my local testing, but I'm struggle to construct a minimal case without to reproduce it.
I assume this reproduces when using the same setup of derive macro implementing a trait while the implementation is missing bounds. I don't know if it is relevant that the derive macro produces a trait. Something along these lines, with the proc macro crate omitted.
yes, it's caused by derive macro.
emmmet this error

Related discussion:
text: <ins> // force-host // no-prefer-dynamic #![crate_type = "proc-macro"] extern crate proc_macro; use proc_macro::TokenStream; #[proc_macro_derive(AddImpl)] pub fn derive(input: TokenStream) -> TokenStream { "use std::cmp::Ordering; impl<T> Ord for PriorityQueue<T> { fn cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> Ordering { self.0.cmp(&self.height) } } " .parse() .unwrap() } </ins>
Code change:
Given the following code: current output is: The last part of the suggestion is not valid Rust code and therefore should not be suggested like this. This problem occurs on the Playground on both stable and nightly with basically identical error messages. serde v1.0.147 requires such that will be . Otherwise the problem does not seem serde specific. <!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
claim
do you know how to create a minimal case without ? so we may add it to unit testing. I give a fix and verified it's OK with my local testing, but I'm struggle to construct a minimal case without to reproduce it.
I assume this reproduces when using the same setup of derive macro implementing a trait while the implementation is missing bounds. I don't know if it is relevant that the derive macro produces a trait. Something along these lines, with the proc macro crate omitted.
yes, it's caused by derive macro.
emmmet this error

Related discussion:
text: <ins> // aux-build:issue-104884.rs use std::collections::BinaryHeap; #[macro_use] extern crate issue_104884; #[derive(PartialEq, Eq, PartialOrd, Ord)] struct PriorityQueueEntry<T> { value: T, } #[derive(PartialOrd, AddImpl)] //~^ ERROR can't compare `PriorityQueue<T>` with `PriorityQueue<T>` //~| ERROR the trait bound `PriorityQueue<T>: Eq` is not satisfied //~| ERROR can't compare `T` with `T` struct PriorityQueue<T>(BinaryHeap<PriorityQueueEntry<T>>); fn main() {} </ins>
Code change:
Given the following code: current output is: The last part of the suggestion is not valid Rust code and therefore should not be suggested like this. This problem occurs on the Playground on both stable and nightly with basically identical error messages. serde v1.0.147 requires such that will be . Otherwise the problem does not seem serde specific. <!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
claim
do you know how to create a minimal case without ? so we may add it to unit testing. I give a fix and verified it's OK with my local testing, but I'm struggle to construct a minimal case without to reproduce it.
I assume this reproduces when using the same setup of derive macro implementing a trait while the implementation is missing bounds. I don't know if it is relevant that the derive macro produces a trait. Something along these lines, with the proc macro crate omitted.
yes, it's caused by derive macro.
emmmet this error

Related discussion:
text: <ins> error[E0277]: can't compare `PriorityQueue<T>` with `PriorityQueue<T>` --> $DIR/issue-104884-trait-impl-sugg-err.rs:13:10 | LL | #[derive(PartialOrd, AddImpl)] |          ^^^^^^^^^^ no implementation for `PriorityQueue<T> == PriorityQueue<T>` | = help: the trait `PartialEq` is not implemented for `PriorityQueue<T>` note: required by a bound in `PartialOrd` --> $SRC_DIR/core/src/cmp.rs:LL:COL | LL | pub trait PartialOrd<Rhs: ?Sized = Self>: PartialEq<Rhs> { |                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `PartialOrd` = note: this error originates in the derive macro `PartialOrd` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info) error[E0277]: the trait bound `PriorityQueue<T>: Eq` is not satisfied --> $DIR/issue-104884-trait-impl-sugg-err.rs:13:22 | LL | #[derive(PartialOrd, AddImpl)] |                      ^^^^^^^ the trait `Eq` is not implemented for `PriorityQueue<T>` | note: required by a bound in `Ord` --> $SRC_DIR/core/src/cmp.rs:LL:COL | LL | pub trait Ord: Eq + PartialOrd<Self> { |                ^^ required by this bound in `Ord` = note: this error originates in the derive macro `AddImpl` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info) error[E0277]: can't compare `T` with `T` --> $DIR/issue-104884-trait-impl-sugg-err.rs:13:22 | LL | #[derive(PartialOrd, AddImpl)] |                      ^^^^^^^ no implementation for `T < T` and `T > T` | note: required for `PriorityQueue<T>` to implement `PartialOrd` --> $DIR/issue-104884-trait-impl-sugg-err.rs:13:10 | LL | #[derive(PartialOrd, AddImpl)] |          ^^^^^^^^^^ note: required by a bound in `Ord` --> $SRC_DIR/core/src/cmp.rs:LL:COL | LL | pub trait Ord: Eq + PartialOrd<Self> { |                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ required by this bound in `Ord` = note: this error originates in the derive macro `AddImpl` which comes from the expansion of the derive macro `PartialOrd` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info) error: aborting due to 3 previous errors For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0277`. </ins>
Code change:
Any ideas?
Regressed with
cc
Is there more information available from the error? The module should not be part of the FreeBSD build. Also, an error in resolving doesn't make much sense to me because that module should exist regardless of whether the feature is enabled. Is it possible that there's either (1) another error further up in the build log, or (2) an existing incorrect dependency that's been exposed by the recent change?
The full log is available here:
It only happens if I build the documentation. Is it possible to fix this problem before rust 1.67 lands?
Reproduced with the following command: could you please see if the patch in fixes the build for you?
Your patch fixes the issue. Many thanks!

Related discussion:
text: //! OS-specific networking functionality. <ins> // See cfg macros in `library/std/src/os/mod.rs` for why these platforms must // be special-cased during rustdoc generation. #[cfg(not(all( doc, any( all(target_arch = "wasm32", not(target_os = "wasi")), all(target_vendor = "fortanix", target_env = "sgx") ) )))] </ins> #[cfg(any(target_os = "linux", target_os = "android", doc))] pub(super) mod linux_ext;
Code change:
I tried this code (): I expected to see this happen: Instead, this happened: This is just a very specific instance where the suggestion to add some code, while "technically correct", is less useful than the better suggestion to remove some code. <!-- 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<!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
claim
label +A-diagnostics
it seems that given an expression, you can generically check if removing the last method call if present would give you the right type, so this could be implemented in a very generic way instead of special casing &str/String.
This looks awesome, thank you so much!
This is how it looks now . Very cool.

Related discussion:
text: // Use `||` to give these suggestions a precedence let _ = self.suggest_missing_parentheses(err, expr) <ins> || self.suggest_remove_last_method_call(err, expr, expected) </ins> || self.suggest_associated_const(err, expr, expected) || self.suggest_deref_ref_or_into(err, expr, expected, expr_ty, expected_ty_expr) || self.suggest_option_to_bool(err, expr, expr_ty, expected)
Code change:
I tried this code (): I expected to see this happen: Instead, this happened: This is just a very specific instance where the suggestion to add some code, while "technically correct", is less useful than the better suggestion to remove some code. <!-- 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<!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
claim
label +A-diagnostics
it seems that given an expression, you can generically check if removing the last method call if present would give you the right type, so this could be implemented in a very generic way instead of special casing &str/String.
This looks awesome, thank you so much!
This is how it looks now . Very cool.

Related discussion:
text: } } <ins> pub fn suggest_remove_last_method_call( &self, err: &mut Diagnostic, expr: &hir::Expr<'tcx>, expected: Ty<'tcx>, ) -> bool { if let hir::ExprKind::MethodCall(hir::PathSegment { ident: method, .. }, recv_expr, &[], _) = expr.kind && let Some(recv_ty) = self.typeck_results.borrow().expr_ty_opt(recv_expr) && self.can_coerce(recv_ty, expected) { let span = if let Some(recv_span) = recv_expr.span.find_ancestor_inside(expr.span) { expr.span.with_lo(recv_span.hi()) } else { expr.span.with_lo(method.span.lo() - rustc_span::BytePos(1)) }; err.span_suggestion_verbose( span, "try removing the method call", "", Applicability::MachineApplicable, ); return true; } false } </ins> pub fn suggest_deref_ref_or_into( &self, err: &mut Diagnostic,
Code change:
I tried this code (): I expected to see this happen: Instead, this happened: This is just a very specific instance where the suggestion to add some code, while "technically correct", is less useful than the better suggestion to remove some code. <!-- 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<!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
claim
label +A-diagnostics
it seems that given an expression, you can generically check if removing the last method call if present would give you the right type, so this could be implemented in a very generic way instead of special casing &str/String.
This looks awesome, thank you so much!
This is how it looks now . Very cool.

Related discussion:
text: <ins> fn test1() { let _v: i32 = (1 as i32).to_string(); //~ ERROR mismatched types // won't suggestion let _v: i32 = (1 as i128).to_string(); //~ ERROR mismatched types let _v: &str = "foo".to_string(); //~ ERROR mismatched types } fn test2() { let mut path: String = "/usr".to_string(); let folder: String = "lib".to_string(); path = format!("{}/{}", path, folder).as_str(); //~ ERROR mismatched types println!("{}", &path); } fn main() { test1(); test2(); } </ins>
Code change:
I tried this code (): I expected to see this happen: Instead, this happened: This is just a very specific instance where the suggestion to add some code, while "technically correct", is less useful than the better suggestion to remove some code. <!-- 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<!-- TRIAGEBOTSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNSTART --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATASTARTTRIAGEBOTASSIGNDATAEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTASSIGNEND --<!-- TRIAGEBOTEND --
claim
label +A-diagnostics
it seems that given an expression, you can generically check if removing the last method call if present would give you the right type, so this could be implemented in a very generic way instead of special casing &str/String.
This looks awesome, thank you so much!
This is how it looks now . Very cool.

Related discussion:
text: <ins> error[E0308]: mismatched types --> $DIR/issue-105494.rs:2:19 | LL |     let _v: i32 = (1 as i32).to_string(); |             ---   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected `i32`, found struct `String` |             | |             expected due to this | help: try removing the method call | LL -     let _v: i32 = (1 as i32).to_string(); LL +     let _v: i32 = (1 as i32); | error[E0308]: mismatched types --> $DIR/issue-105494.rs:5:19 | LL |     let _v: i32 = (1 as i128).to_string(); |             ---   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected `i32`, found struct `String` |             | |             expected due to this error[E0308]: mismatched types --> $DIR/issue-105494.rs:7:20 | LL |     let _v: &str = "foo".to_string(); |             ----   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected `&str`, found struct `String` |             | |             expected due to this | help: try removing the method call | LL -     let _v: &str = "foo".to_string(); LL +     let _v: &str = "foo"; | error[E0308]: mismatched types --> $DIR/issue-105494.rs:14:12 | LL |     let mut path: String = "/usr".to_string(); |                   ------ expected due to this type ... LL |     path = format!("{}/{}", path, folder).as_str(); |            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ expected struct `String`, found `&str` | help: try removing the method call | LL -     path = format!("{}/{}", path, folder).as_str(); LL +     path = format!("{}/{}", path, folder); | error: aborting due to 4 previous errors For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0308`. </ins>