Stream: t-compiler/wg-nll

Topic: pre-triage 2019.03.20


pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 14:33, on Zulip):

I'll be taking pre-meeting triage notes regarding NLL in here

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 14:55, on Zulip):

there are two A-NLL issues that are otherwise unprioritized. correction: uncategorized

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 14:55, on Zulip):

first: "Remove -Zborrowck=compare" #59193

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 14:56, on Zulip):

this doesn't block anything, its just code-cleanup (and is tagged accordingly). Tagging as P-medium.

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 14:57, on Zulip):

next: "Simplify handling of feature(bind_by_move_pattern_guards)" #59192

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 14:57, on Zulip):

this likewise doesn't block anything. its code-cleanup (and is tagged accordingly). Tagging as P-medium.

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 14:59, on Zulip):

oh, those issues were also uncategorized (with respect to NLL-* tags)

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 14:59, on Zulip):

they're both kind of internal code cleanliness issues, the existing NLL-* tags do not really apply to them.

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:00, on Zulip):

I'll change the "Uncategorized" link to filter out things that are tagged C-cleanup

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:02, on Zulip):

there are seven A-NLL issues that are otherwise unprioritized

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:03, on Zulip):

first: "confusing error message around trait object bound" #54779

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:10, on Zulip):

I left some notes. This continues to be not high priority

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:10, on Zulip):

I'm going to tag it as P-medium

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:12, on Zulip):

next: "nll: strange suggestion to "consider removing the *" #54985

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:14, on Zulip):

a similar case, perhaps even less critical than the previous one if one wanted to try to relate priorities.

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:16, on Zulip):

next: "NLL diagnostic regression on generator + short-lived yield" #56508

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:17, on Zulip):

I don't know how to prioritize this one, because I cannot tell if it is going to represent a significant hiccup for people using features like async/await

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:17, on Zulip):

nominating for discussion at tonight's meeting

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:24, on Zulip):

next: " &mut &T coerced to &T suggests &mut mut x" #57431

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:24, on Zulip):

this actually looks pretty bad. I'm going to tag it as P-high.

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:27, on Zulip):

next: "first/second mutable borrow occurs here wrong diagnostic in nll" #57526

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:31, on Zulip):

I ... am tempted to also tag this as P-high, but it doesn't seem quite as dire as #57431 was

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:32, on Zulip):

(the heart of the issue is that one might think the compiler is buggy in terms of its claims of first/second, but the reality is that the first+second are correct w.r.t. control-flow. the problem is that its going around a loop, so the source flow is the opposite of the control-flow you need to observe the problem.)

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:32, on Zulip):

I think I'll leave this untagged for this week. I'll hopefully make up my mind next week about how to prioritize this.

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:35, on Zulip):

next: "Confusing first/second mutable borrow occurs here diagnostic in NLL" #57528

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:35, on Zulip):

... this ... looks like a dupe of #57526 ?

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:36, on Zulip):

@Santiago Pastorino ^ is #57528 an accidental duplicate of #57526 ?

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:37, on Zulip):

last: "issue triage: closures, lifetimes, and nll" #57964

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:38, on Zulip):

my comment on this issue still applies: I don't see much point in trying to assign high priority until #57804 is addressed

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:39, on Zulip):

okay so that's all the unprioritized issues. (Some remain unprioritized but I don't mind waiting until next week to finish dealing with them.)

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:40, on Zulip):

next: Unassigned P-high issues -- there aren't any, yay!

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:41, on Zulip):

okay. And we have three nominated issues

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:42, on Zulip):

I just nominated #56508

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:43, on Zulip):

next: "NLL compile-time performance regression" #58178 ; I had nominated this two weeks ago, but that was to find someone to work on it. @csmoe volunteered after that point. So I'll unnominate.

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:44, on Zulip):

the last nominated issue is "More restrictive 2 phase borrows - take 2" #58739; the nomination is targeted at the lang team, but as I mentioned on the topic for this PR, I am wondering if we can at least land the PR by changing the lint to default to #![allow].

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:45, on Zulip):

but to be honest I think that is unnecessary. Or at least, we can wait until tomorrow; hopefully the lang team will come to consensus then.

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:46, on Zulip):

(If the lang team fails to reach consensus tomorrow as to what to here, then I will raise the suggestion to default to #![allow] again.)

pnkfelix (Mar 20 2019 at 15:47, on Zulip):

and that's all the pre-triage! I'm heading home now, see you all at tonight's meeting.

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 20 2019 at 18:51, on Zulip):

Santiago Pastorino ^ is #57528 an accidental duplicate of #57526 ?

definitely duplicated, unsure what happened there because both issues were edited

Last update: Nov 21 2019 at 23:55UTC