Skip to content
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

Tracking Issue for transmute_generic_consts #109929

Open
2 tasks
JulianKnodt opened this issue Apr 4, 2023 · 3 comments
Open
2 tasks

Tracking Issue for transmute_generic_consts #109929

JulianKnodt opened this issue Apr 4, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
C-tracking-issue Category: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFC T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@JulianKnodt
Copy link
Contributor

JulianKnodt commented Apr 4, 2023

The feature gate for the issue is #![feature(transmute_generic_consts)].

About tracking issues

Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation.
They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions.
A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature.
Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.

Steps

Unresolved Questions

  • Maybe feature gate should be generic_const_array_size?

XXX --- list all the "unresolved questions" found in the RFC to ensure they are
not forgotten

Implementation history

Implemented in #106281

@JulianKnodt JulianKnodt added the C-tracking-issue Category: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFC label Apr 4, 2023
@Noratrieb Noratrieb added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Apr 5, 2023
@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Apr 18, 2023

this feels very related to the work of the safe transmute working group, cc #99571

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Apr 18, 2023

I don't think we should add many hacks to the current transmute check and don't believe that an implementation which does so should be stabilized. I would instead expect to also handle this as part of the BikeshedIntrinsicFrom trait.

@dvdhrm
Copy link
Contributor

dvdhrm commented Jul 24, 2023

FYI: The feature gate is called transmute_generic_consts (rather than wrongly referenced in title and summary: transmute_const_generics).

@lcnr lcnr changed the title Tracking Issue for transmute_const_generics Tracking Issue for transmute_generic_consts Jul 24, 2023
dvdhrm added a commit to dvdhrm/rust that referenced this issue Jul 24, 2023
Extend the `SizeSkeleton` evaluator to shortcut zero-sized arrays, thus
considering `[T; 0]` to have a compile-time fixed-size of 0.

The existing evaluator already deals with generic arrays under the
feature-guard `transmute_const_generics`. However, it merely allows
comparing fixed-size types with fixed-size types, and generic types with
generic types. For generic types, it merely compares whether their
arguments match (ordering them first). Even if their exact sizes are not
known at compile time, it can ensure that they will eventually be the
same.

This patch extends this by shortcutting the size-evaluation of zero
sized arrays and thus allowing size comparisons of `()` with `[T; 0]`,
where one contains generics and the other does not.

This code is guarded by `transmute_const_generics` (rust-lang#109929), even
though it is unclear whether it should be. However, this assumes that a
separate stabilization PR is required to move this out of the feature
guard.

Initially reported in rust-lang#98104.
workingjubilee added a commit to workingjubilee/rustc that referenced this issue Mar 7, 2024
compiler: allow transmute of ZST arrays with generics

Extend the `SizeSkeleton` evaluator to shortcut zero-sized arrays, thus considering `[T; 0]` to have a compile-time fixed-size of 0.

The existing evaluator already deals with generic arrays under the feature-guard `transmute_const_generics`. However, it merely allows comparing fixed-size types with fixed-size types, and generic types with generic types. For generic types, it merely compares whether their arguments match (ordering them first). Even if their exact sizes are not known at compile time, it can ensure that they will eventually be the same.

This patch extends this by shortcutting the size-evaluation of zero sized arrays and thus allowing size comparisons of `()` with `[T; 0]`, where one contains generics and the other does not.

This code is guarded by `transmute_const_generics` (rust-lang#109929), even though it is unclear whether it should be. However, this assumes that a separate stabilization PR is required to move this out of the feature guard.

Initially reported in rust-lang#98104.
matthiaskrgr pushed a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this issue Mar 22, 2024
Extend the `SizeSkeleton` evaluator to shortcut zero-sized arrays, thus
considering `[T; 0]` to have a compile-time fixed-size of 0.

The existing evaluator already deals with generic arrays under the
feature-guard `transmute_const_generics`. However, it merely allows
comparing fixed-size types with fixed-size types, and generic types with
generic types. For generic types, it merely compares whether their
arguments match (ordering them first). Even if their exact sizes are not
known at compile time, it can ensure that they will eventually be the
same.

This patch extends this by shortcutting the size-evaluation of zero
sized arrays and thus allowing size comparisons of `()` with `[T; 0]`,
where one contains generics and the other does not.

This code is guarded by `transmute_const_generics` (rust-lang#109929), even
though it is unclear whether it should be. However, this assumes that a
separate stabilization PR is required to move this out of the feature
guard.

Initially reported in rust-lang#98104.
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this issue Mar 22, 2024
compiler: allow transmute of ZST arrays with generics

Extend the `SizeSkeleton` evaluator to shortcut zero-sized arrays, thus considering `[T; 0]` to have a compile-time fixed-size of 0.

The existing evaluator already deals with generic arrays under the feature-guard `transmute_const_generics`. However, it merely allows comparing fixed-size types with fixed-size types, and generic types with generic types. For generic types, it merely compares whether their arguments match (ordering them first). Even if their exact sizes are not known at compile time, it can ensure that they will eventually be the same.

This patch extends this by shortcutting the size-evaluation of zero sized arrays and thus allowing size comparisons of `()` with `[T; 0]`, where one contains generics and the other does not.

This code is guarded by `transmute_const_generics` (rust-lang#109929), even though it is unclear whether it should be. However, this assumes that a separate stabilization PR is required to move this out of the feature guard.

Initially reported in rust-lang#98104.
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this issue Mar 23, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#114009 - dvdhrm:pr/transmzst, r=pnkfelix

compiler: allow transmute of ZST arrays with generics

Extend the `SizeSkeleton` evaluator to shortcut zero-sized arrays, thus considering `[T; 0]` to have a compile-time fixed-size of 0.

The existing evaluator already deals with generic arrays under the feature-guard `transmute_const_generics`. However, it merely allows comparing fixed-size types with fixed-size types, and generic types with generic types. For generic types, it merely compares whether their arguments match (ordering them first). Even if their exact sizes are not known at compile time, it can ensure that they will eventually be the same.

This patch extends this by shortcutting the size-evaluation of zero sized arrays and thus allowing size comparisons of `()` with `[T; 0]`, where one contains generics and the other does not.

This code is guarded by `transmute_const_generics` (rust-lang#109929), even though it is unclear whether it should be. However, this assumes that a separate stabilization PR is required to move this out of the feature guard.

Initially reported in rust-lang#98104.
@Noratrieb Noratrieb added T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. and removed T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Nov 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
C-tracking-issue Category: An issue tracking the progress of sth. like the implementation of an RFC T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants