Allow defining opaques in check_coroutine_obligations
#118161
Merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In the new trait solver, when an obligation stalls on an unresolved coroutine witness, we will stash away the root obligation, even if the stalled obligation is only a distant descendent of the root obligation, since the new solver is purely recursive.
This means that we may need to reprocess alias-relate obligations (and others) which may define opaque types in the new solver. Currently, we use the coroutine's def id as the defining anchor in
check_coroutine_obligations
, which will allow defining no opaque types, resulting in errors like:So this PR fixes the defining anchor and does the same trick as
check_opaque_well_formed
, where we manually compare opaques that were defined against their hidden types to make sure they weren't defined differently when processing these stalled coroutine obligations.r? @lcnr cc @cjgillot