Update rust toolchain version#750
Merged
celinval merged 4 commits intomodel-checking:mainfrom Jan 17, 2022
Merged
Conversation
danielsn
reviewed
Jan 13, 2022
Comment on lines
384
to
395
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This NullOp::Box had deprecated and replaced by ShallowInitBox. So they finally removed it.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
danielsn
reviewed
Jan 14, 2022
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What if we made a function
fn normalize_type(ty: Ty<'tcx>) -> Ty<'tcx> {
ty
}
danielsn
approved these changes
Jan 14, 2022
Contributor
danielsn
left a comment
danielsn
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Approved modulo discussion
Add a TODO and a link to the issue.
In order to make it easier to read and implement in the future.
This exact line where the assertion is may change whenever we update the rust toolchain, which makes this test unreliable. We still ensure that the assertion fails. Note that this may still fail if the message or the check gets updated, but this shouldn't happen frequently.
celinval
force-pushed
the
issue-747-merge
branch
from
2c18120 to
9d4a26d
Compare
Contributor
Author
Thanks. I added the placeholder function as suggested. |
tedinski
pushed a commit
to tedinski/rmc
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 26, 2022
Fixes model-checking#747. * Update typ.rs. Add a placeholder for type normalization function to make it easier to read and implement in the future. * Remove the LOC of expected failure on std function. This exact line where the assertion is may change whenever we update the rust toolchain, which makes this test unreliable. We still ensure that the assertion fails. Note that this may still fail if the message or the check gets updated, but this shouldn't happen frequently.
tedinski
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 27, 2022
Fixes #747. * Update typ.rs. Add a placeholder for type normalization function to make it easier to read and implement in the future. * Remove the LOC of expected failure on std function. This exact line where the assertion is may change whenever we update the rust toolchain, which makes this test unreliable. We still ensure that the assertion fails. Note that this may still fail if the message or the check gets updated, but this shouldn't happen frequently.
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
2 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.
Description of changes:
Update toolchain version to the latest nightly version.
Resolved issues:
Resolves #747
Call-outs:
There has been a fixed that was pushed to rustc where they now normalize the struct-tail type when satisfying a Pointee obligation. I have not applied the fix yet, and this change keeps the same behavior for rmc. I wasn't able to reproduce the issue posted in the related PR yet. rust-lang/rust#92248
Testing:
How is this change tested?
Is this a refactor change?
Checklist
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 and MIT licenses.