interpret: only consider 1-ZST when searching for receiver #99972
Conversation
| r? @cjgillot (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot added the T-compiler 
| Some changes occurred to the CTFE / Miri engine cc @rust-lang/miri |
rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review 
| Aligned ZST would increase the alignment of the |
Yeah but they also would be rejected in a This PR can, at worst, lead to more panics in Miri in case there are dyn receivers that do weird things. But if those exist that would probably be a bug. So it's essentially a stricter sanity check. We can add it to Oli's pile and hope he's back from vacation soon. ;) |
| @lcnr maybe you could take a look? |
| lgtm @bors r+ rollup |
bors added S-waiting-on-bors 
…iaskrgr Rollup of 15 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#99474 (Rustdoc json tests: New `@hasexact` test command) - rust-lang#99972 (interpret: only consider 1-ZST when searching for receiver) - rust-lang#100018 (Clean up `LitKind`) - rust-lang#100379 (triagebot: add translation-related mention groups) - rust-lang#100389 (Do not report cycle error when inferring return type for suggestion) - rust-lang#100489 (`is_knowable` use `Result` instead of `Option`) - rust-lang#100532 (unwind: don't build dependency when building for Miri) - rust-lang#100608 (needless separation of impl blocks) - rust-lang#100621 (Pass +atomics-32 feature for {arm,thumb}v4t-none-eabi) - rust-lang#100646 (Migrate emoji identifier diagnostics to `SessionDiagnostic` in rustc_interface) - rust-lang#100652 (Remove deferred sized checks (make them eager)) - rust-lang#100655 (Update books) - rust-lang#100656 (Update cargo) - rust-lang#100660 (Fixed a few documentation errors) - rust-lang#100661 (Fixed a few documentation errors) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
7 participants
repr(transparent)currently entirely rejects ZST with alignment larger than 1 (which is odd, arguably this should be accepted), so this should be safe. And if it ever isn't safe then that is very likely a bug elsewhere in the compiler.