-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Validate AggregateKind types in MIR #120137
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -796,7 +796,67 @@ impl<'a, 'tcx> Visitor<'tcx> for TypeChecker<'a, 'tcx> { | |
}; | ||
} | ||
match rvalue { | ||
Rvalue::Use(_) | Rvalue::CopyForDeref(_) | Rvalue::Aggregate(..) => {} | ||
Rvalue::Use(_) | Rvalue::CopyForDeref(_) => {} | ||
Rvalue::Aggregate(kind, fields) => match **kind { | ||
AggregateKind::Tuple => {} | ||
AggregateKind::Array(dest) => { | ||
for src in fields { | ||
if !self.mir_assign_valid_types(src.ty(self.body, self.tcx), dest) { | ||
self.fail(location, "array field has the wrong type"); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} | ||
AggregateKind::Adt(def_id, idx, args, _, Some(field)) => { | ||
let adt_def = self.tcx.adt_def(def_id); | ||
assert!(adt_def.is_union()); | ||
assert_eq!(idx, FIRST_VARIANT); | ||
let dest = adt_def.non_enum_variant().fields[field].ty(self.tcx, args); | ||
if fields.len() != 1 { | ||
self.fail(location, "unions should have one initialized field"); | ||
} | ||
if !self.mir_assign_valid_types(fields.raw[0].ty(self.body, self.tcx), dest) { | ||
self.fail(location, "union field has the wrong type"); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
AggregateKind::Adt(def_id, idx, args, _, None) => { | ||
let adt_def = self.tcx.adt_def(def_id); | ||
assert!(!adt_def.is_union()); | ||
let variant = &adt_def.variants()[idx]; | ||
if variant.fields.len() != fields.len() { | ||
self.fail(location, "adt has the wrong number of initialized fields"); | ||
} | ||
for (src, dest) in std::iter::zip(fields, &variant.fields) { | ||
if !self.mir_assign_valid_types( | ||
src.ty(self.body, self.tcx), | ||
dest.ty(self.tcx, args), | ||
) { | ||
self.fail(location, "adt field has the wrong type"); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} | ||
AggregateKind::Closure(_, args) => { | ||
let upvars = args.as_closure().upvar_tys(); | ||
if upvars.len() != fields.len() { | ||
self.fail(location, "closure has the wrong number of initialized fields"); | ||
} | ||
for (src, dest) in std::iter::zip(fields, upvars) { | ||
if !self.mir_assign_valid_types(src.ty(self.body, self.tcx), dest) { | ||
self.fail(location, "closure field has the wrong type"); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} | ||
AggregateKind::Coroutine(_, args) => { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Seems like the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. No, they differ with how they handle their args. See the |
||
let upvars = args.as_coroutine().upvar_tys(); | ||
if upvars.len() != fields.len() { | ||
self.fail(location, "coroutine has the wrong number of initialized fields"); | ||
} | ||
for (src, dest) in std::iter::zip(fields, upvars) { | ||
if !self.mir_assign_valid_types(src.ty(self.body, self.tcx), dest) { | ||
self.fail(location, "coroutine field has the wrong type"); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} | ||
}, | ||
Rvalue::Ref(_, BorrowKind::Fake, _) => { | ||
if self.mir_phase >= MirPhase::Runtime(RuntimePhase::Initial) { | ||
self.fail( | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Note: this is a weird name for a method returning
bool
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(But pre-existing, so no need to change anything in this PR.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I will not change it in that case 😅