Miscellaneous cleanups to borrowck related code #150550
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
| let (idx, _) = self.location_map.insert_full(location, borrow); | ||
| let idx = BorrowIndex::from(idx); | ||
|
|
||
| self.insert_as_pending_if_two_phase(location, assigned_place, kind, idx); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this felt very confusing to read to me. we first insert the borrow with the wrong activation location (we assume its not two phase). and then insert_as_pending_if_two_phase does more than it says and actually fixes up the activation location to what it should have been from the start
I inlined this function as it only had one call site and deferred inserting into the location map until we actually choose a TwoPhaseActivation to use.
| /// Returns whether borrows represented by this kind are allowed to be split into separate | ||
| /// Reservation and Activation phases. | ||
| pub fn allows_two_phase_borrow(&self) -> bool { | ||
| pub fn is_two_phase_borrow(&self) -> bool { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in some sense its always a two phase borrow, just sometimes its activated at the same point its created I think?
The previous name confused me because it made it sound like a reference may or may not be a two phase borrow and then we went on to unconditionally treat it as two phase without ever checking if it "actually is".
| constraints.push(c) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Currently `implied_outlives_bounds` will normalize the provided |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure how useful a lot of my comments here actually are given afaik @tiif is rewriting the logic for computing implies bounds so this code might just all get yoten soon:tm:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i think the core logic here won't change too much, so it will still be very useful :3
4 participants
r? lcnr