merge ambiguity errors that blame the same inference variable - #159593
Open
Albab-Hasan wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
merge ambiguity errors that blame the same inference variable#159593Albab-Hasan wants to merge 2 commits into
Albab-Hasan wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Contributor
|
looks vaguely good to me, gonna reassign though as I don't have the capacity to properly review this rn @rustbot reroll |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Contributor
Author
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
Contributor
Author
|
@jackh726 hello, just wanted to follow up on the pr. sorry if this is bothering you |
Contributor
Author
|
@rustbot reroll |
khyperia
reviewed
Aug 6, 2026
| LL - x.foo(); | ||
| LL + <Vec<T> as Foo>::foo(&x); | ||
| | | ||
|
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I haven't dug at all into the change itself yet, but e.g. this diff seems unfortunate. Is it possible to keep mentioning the impls and whatnot here?
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Albab-Hasan
force-pushed
the
merge-ambiguity-errors
branch
from
August 12, 2026 04:11
578ea93 to
ca47683
Compare
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
multiple `FulfillmentErrorCode::Ambiguity` obligations on the same inference variable only ever reported the first — the rest got dropped after `set_tainted_by_errors` fired. grouped them by sub-unification-table root and fold Trait/Projection predicates from the group into notes on the primary. uses the sub root not the raw TyVid so variables unified by a pending Coerce obligation correctly land in the same group. fixes rust-lang#103911
Albab-Hasan
force-pushed
the
merge-ambiguity-errors
branch
from
August 12, 2026 08:12
ca47683 to
e27cb9b
Compare
Collaborator
|
This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed. Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
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.
multiple
FulfillmentErrorCode::Ambiguityobligations on the same inference variable only ever reported the first. the rest got dropped afterset_tainted_by_errorsfired. grouped them by sub-unification-table root and fold Trait/Projection predicates from the group into notes on the primary. uses the sub root not the raw TyVid so variables unified by a pending Coerce obligation correctly land in the same group.fixes #103911
r? @lcnr