Repository navigation
elided_lifetimes_in_paths lint is broken #51902
Description
Using the latest stable compiler(1.27) (and probably earlier ones too) given the snippet:
#![deny(elided_lifetimes_in_paths)]
struct Bar<'a> {
a: &'a i32,
}
fn main() {
let bar = Bar::<'_> {a: &42};
}we get the error:
error: hidden lifetime parameters are deprecated, try `Foo<'_>`
--> src/main.rs:8:21
|
8 | let bar = Bar::<'_> {a: &42};
| ^^
|
note: lint level defined here
--> src/main.rs:1:9
|
1 | #![deny(elided_lifetimes_in_paths)]
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
error: aborting due to previous errorThis makes no sense, both because the name Foo is constant in the error message, and both because the lifetime parameter suggested doesn't fix anything. (again, because the error message is just a constant)
https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc/lint/builtin/static.ELIDED_LIFETIMES_IN_PATHS.html
Note, this does compile:
#![deny(elided_lifetimes_in_paths)]
struct Bar<'a> {
a: &'a i32,
}
fn fun<'a>() {
let bar = Bar::<'a> {a: &42};
}
fn main() {
fun();
}but since main can't have any lifetime parameters, Bar can no be initialized directly in main, and fun is defined with a lifetime parameter that is only used internally, rather than giving any information about how the function is to be used.
while experimenting with the same code, THIS COMPILED:
// #![deny(elided_lifetimes_in_paths)] // Note this is commented out, as in, unrelated
struct Foo {
a: i32
}
struct Bar<'a> {
a: &'a Foo,
}
fn fun<'a>() -> Bar<'a> {
let bar = Bar::<'a> {a: &Foo{a: 42}};
bar
}
fn main() {
fun();
}EDIT: This last example compiles because of the "rvalue static promotion" feature, which i was not aware of when opening the issue. Had that Foo been a mutable local variable, this would correctly fail. Learn something new every day :)
See also #51903.
Activity
zackmdavis commentedon Aug 11, 2018
The elided-lifetimes-in-paths lint was rewritten in #52069; the example code in this issue no longer warns.
reuvenpo commentedon Aug 14, 2018
Awesome :)
This would solve the first part of this issue.
As far as i understand the second part is still an open question though.
(And, of course, the third one is no issue at all :) )
zackmdavis commentedon Oct 31, 2018
Can you be more explicit? I assume "the second part" refers to the part of the issue starting with "Note, this does compile", but I don't understand what you're suggesting the compiler should do differently. I'm going to close this to keep the issue-tracker tidy, but please re-open or file a new issue if you still have concerns with the
elided_lifetimes_in_pathslint (or anything else).reuvenpo commentedon Oct 31, 2018
Oh, you know what @zackmdavis, I'm not sure what I was thinking when I wrote my previous comment, but if the snippet you sent compiles, then the same trick (using
Bar::<'_> { a: &42 }) should work to make my seconds example look nicer (basically, not having to specify a generic type parameter in a function signature that does not apply to any of its parameters or return value).Thanks for the help :)