Nadrieril
Nadrieril
It's either in AssocItem or it's one of the last missing things.
I added this info in https://github.com/hacspec/hax/pull/1069
Only speaking of the MIR lowering part: my opinion on the current implementation is that this is a fine approach for an experiment, but this will need to change in...
In terms of the experiment, my current take is that using patterns for this doesn't pull its weight. I expect we won't allow guaranteed-direct-jump using a non-fully-const value like: ```rust...
> Const eval needs a fully built MIR body I meant we should manipulate the constant with a `CompileTimeInterpCx` instead of going through a valtree; we indeed cannot evaluate the...
> Only integers, bools and fieldless enums are supported Does the feature not intend to go further than that? Again, I'm just saying "btw, here are my ideas for implementing...
It had skipped my mind that I was the one assigned to this. I have reviewed and approve of the `static_pattern_match` part as an experiment. I would like someone else...
Oh wild, I didn't know! Having the same MIR as Miri sounds good though, since this is what ppl use to ensure lack of UB in their projects.
Looking through std, the `cfg(miri)` I see are for `intrinsics::miri_promise_symbolic_alignment`, tests, and hiding away os details or inline assembly we don't want to see either. As far as I can...
Tried it again just now, this got fixed in the meantime :)