get_impl_paths more exhaustive checks #1342
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| // There can't be user impls of these traits, they can only be built-in. | ||
|
|
||
| // TODO: Send and Sync needs handling, or a rigorous argument why it's ok to skip; | ||
| // See https://github.com/verus-lang/verus/issues/1335 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I commented on #1335 . Is this TODO considered resolved, or does it need more discussion?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm genuinely unsure about this one; if there's no issue, I'd still like to see a rigorous argument.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, I tried to write out a more rigorous argument in #1335 .
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
get_impl_pathserrors if it finds a trait bound that it doesn't know how to handle. Similar in spirit to #1341This leaves a few open issues:
codegen_select_candidatereturnsErrsometimes, and we just ignore it. Was that intentional on our part? I would have expected to never seeErrunless we weren't calling it properly.