Skip to content

resolve: Do not consider traits from ambiguous imports to be in scope #147995

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

resolve: Do not consider traits from ambiguous imports to be in scope #147995

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+114 −1

Conversation

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

@petrochenkov petrochenkov commented Oct 22, 2025 •
edited
Loading

One of unblocking steps for #145108.
Fixes #147992.

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Oct 22, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 22, 2025

r? @madsmtm

rustbot has assigned @madsmtm.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Oct 22, 2025

@bors try

@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 22, 2025
@rust-bors
Auto merge of #147995 - petrochenkov:gamtinsc, r=<try>
ed60662 
resolve: Do not consider traits from ambiguous imports to be in scope
@petrochenkov petrochenkov added S-waiting-on-crater Status: Waiting on a crater run to be completed. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Oct 22, 2025
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Oct 22, 2025

cc @LorrensP-2158466

@petrochenkov petrochenkov mentioned this pull request Oct 22, 2025
Open
@rust-bors
Copy link

rust-bors bot commented Oct 22, 2025

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: ed60662 (ed606620234c6b50f2414162c4bbabd5f4a925f3, parent: f5e2df741b4a9820a7579f0c8eccc951706a8782)

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Oct 22, 2025

@craterbot check

@craterbot
Copy link
Collaborator

craterbot commented Oct 22, 2025

👌 Experiment pr-147995 created and queued.
🤖 Automatically detected try build ed60662
🔍 You can check out the queue and this experiment's details.

ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

@craterbot
Copy link
Collaborator

craterbot commented Oct 24, 2025

🚧 Experiment pr-147995 is now running

ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

madsmtm
madsmtm reviewed Oct 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
tests/ui/imports/ambiguous-trait-in-scope.rs
impl Trait for u8 {}
}

fn test1() {
Copy link
Contributor

@madsmtm madsmtm Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: Could you add #[rustfmt::skip] to this and test2, I'd be worried about the test no longer testing the right thing if someone decided to reformat these.

madsmtm
madsmtm reviewed Oct 24, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@madsmtm madsmtm left a comment •
edited by rustbot
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This makes sense to me, and I agree that it needs a crater run.

View changes since this review

@craterbot
Copy link
Collaborator

craterbot commented Oct 25, 2025

🎉 Experiment pr-147995 is completed!
📊 135 regressed and 3 fixed (721923 total)
📊 1777 spurious results on the retry-regessed-list.txt, consider a retry1 if this is a significant amount.
📰 Open the summary report.

⚠️ If you notice any spurious failure please add them to the denylist!
ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

Footnotes

  1. re-run the experiment with crates=https://crater-reports.s3.amazonaws.com/pr-147995/retry-regressed-list.txt ↩

@craterbot craterbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-crater Status: Waiting on a crater run to be completed. labels Oct 25, 2025
@petrochenkov petrochenkov added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Oct 27, 2025
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Oct 28, 2025

All the root regressions (31 of them) are

error[E0599]: no method named `method` found for type `Type` in the current scope

, as expected.
Also many non-root regressions in crates depending on various versions of sophia_api and polars-plan.

I guess we need to somehow preserve these traits in scope, but keep them poisoned, so an error (or a lint) can be reported later during type checking.

@madsmtm
Copy link
Contributor

madsmtm commented Oct 28, 2025

I guess we need to somehow preserve these traits in scope, but keep them poisoned, so an error (or a lint) can be reported later during type checking.

Or a FCW, I think it makes sense to break this someday.

@yaahc yaahc added the A-resolve Area: Name/path resolution done by `rustc_resolve` specifically label Oct 28, 2025
lcnr
lcnr reviewed Oct 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@lcnr lcnr left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

how difficult is the alternative of treating overlapping trait wildcard imports as use module::Trait as _; instead

View changes since this review

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Oct 29, 2025

I guess we need to somehow preserve these traits in scope, but keep them poisoned, so an error (or a lint) can be reported later during type checking.

Or a FCW, I think it makes sense to break this someday.

FCW will also have to be reported in type checking, can't do that without keeping the poisoned traits in scope.

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor Author

petrochenkov commented Oct 29, 2025

how difficult is the alternative of treating overlapping trait wildcard imports as use module::Trait as _; instead

View changes since this review

I'll try to implement both the alternatives and look what's simpler.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@madsmtm madsmtm madsmtm left review comments

@lcnr lcnr lcnr left review comments

+1 more reviewer

@LorrensP-2158466 LorrensP-2158466 LorrensP-2158466 left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@madsmtm madsmtm

Labels

A-resolve Area: Name/path resolution done by `rustc_resolve` specifically S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

The set of traits in scope behaves unpredictably in presence of ambiguous glob imports

7 participants

@petrochenkov @rustbot @craterbot @madsmtm @lcnr @LorrensP-2158466 @yaahc