Michael Goulet
Michael Goulet
The comment here is the answer https://github.com/rust-lang/reference/pull/1259/files#r1404804424. I don't think this needs further changing. It doesn't really matter if the pointer is bad; upcasting only cares about the vtable metadata.
This is not unsound, so I'm gonna untag it as such.
@craterbot p=1 This is 2k crates, so let's not have to wait behind the ~4 million other crates worth of jobs that are currently queued.
How does this interact with RFC #3014? Isn't `must_not_suspend` the same as `diagnostic::blocking`? Would like to see that mentioned in the RFC -- if it's similar enough, then this RFC...
Yeah, I think the main distinction is that *values* must not suspend, but *calls* are blocking. I am curious if these can be unified futher, but worst case `must_not_suspend` should...
Since I don't think it's been acknowledged above, for the record, this breaks the following code: ``` fn hello(x: &bool) { assert!(x); } ``` Because `&bool: Not`.
This *was* fixed by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/116040, but that was not sound. Fixing this is particularly nontrivial. This may be easier to address soon if https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131033 lands and is then stabilized, since...
> Am I missing something? I think so :) So the RPITIT wouldn't be capturing `self: &Self`, but instead it would be capturing `Self`, the implicit type parameter of the...
@clarfonthey: A few things regarding your last comment-- It's not correct to call the relationship between `[T; N]` and `[T]` subtyping (which I know you're not doing explicitly, but you...
@bushrat011899 (and others who want to comment too): You'll probably get more success if you follow oli-obk's advice and use an inline comment so it can be threaded correctly and...