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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
Always error on
SizeOverflow
during mir evaluation #63152Always error on
SizeOverflow
during mir evaluation #63152Changes from 6 commits
83b5eb9
58bd878
d3da411
2c56842
db099fb
2340067
387dcff
bdd79b8
f621f89
ce8510a
613c0a8
64469ac
3144b0a
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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'm fine merging as is with a FIXME in place for adding a useful (not duplicated) note here. It's likely a bit involeved in the const eval engine, since the way I'm imagining it requires annotating every layout_of call.
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.
Yeah, I thought about that too and came to the same conclusion.
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 think I have a way to make a separate label that won't be too hacky. What do you think a good wording for this error would be/what the end result should look like?
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.
The problem is that there are many situations in const eval that compute layouts and could thus fail. I think we should label each with their own message. If we hardcode a message for just this case it will be nonsensical in all other cases.
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 just removed the label altogether and left the main message only
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.
That span isn't ideal, but it's hard to do better in the MIR, especially as there may be no HIR local in the case of temporaries. Not sure what to do about it
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 agree, but at the same time it's a huge improvement over the current "good luck finding where the problem is" state of this error.