-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 562
Add a chapter on divergence #2067
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.
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ | ||
| r[divergence] | ||
| # Divergence | ||
|
|
||
| r[divergence.intro] | ||
| Divergence is the state where a particular section of code could never be encountered at runtime. Importantly, while there are certain language constructs that immediately produce a _diverging expression_ of the type [`!`](./types/never.md), divergence can also propogate to the surrounding block. | ||
|
|
||
| Any expression of type [`!`](./types/never.md) is a _diverging expression_, but there are also diverging expressions which are not of type `!` (e.g. `Some(panic!())`). | ||
|
|
||
| r[divergence.fallback] | ||
| ## Fallback | ||
| If a type to be inferred is only unified with diverging expressions, then that type will be inferred to be `!`. | ||
|
|
||
| > [!EXAMPLE] | ||
| > ```rust,compile_fail,E0277 | ||
| > fn foo() -> i32 { 22 } | ||
| > match foo() { | ||
| > // ERROR: The trait bound `!: Default` is not satisfied. | ||
| > 4 => Default::default(), | ||
| > _ => return, | ||
| > }; | ||
| > ``` | ||
|
Comment on lines
+7
to
+21
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It feels that we might need to say more here to guard against too simple a reading. We say, 1) not all diverging expressions have type However, of course, this does not compile: trait Tr: Sized {
fn m() -> Self { loop {} }
}
impl<T> Tr for T {}
fn f() -> u8 { 0 }
fn g() -> ! {
match f() {
0 => Tr::m(),
// ^^^^^^^ There's a type to be inferred here.
_ => Some(panic!()),
// ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is a diverging expression.
} // ERROR: Mismatched types.
}What might we be able to say to tease this apart? |
||
| > [!EDITION-2024] | ||
| > Before the 2024 edition, the type was inferred to instead be `()`. | ||
| > [!NOTE] | ||
| > Importantly, type unification may happen *structurally*, so the fallback `!` may be part of a larger type. The > following compiles: | ||
| > ```rust | ||
| > fn foo() -> i32 { 22 } | ||
| > // This has the type `Option<!>`, not `!` | ||
| > match foo() { | ||
| > 4 => Default::default(), | ||
| > _ => Some(return), | ||
| > }; | ||
| > ``` | ||
| <!-- TODO: This last point should likely should be moved to a more general "type inference" section discussing generalization + unification. --> | ||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ r[expr.block.result] | |
| Then the final operand is executed, if given. | ||
|
|
||
| r[expr.block.type] | ||
| The type of a block is the type of the final operand, or `()` if the final operand is omitted. | ||
| Except in the case of divergence (see below), the type of a block is the type of the final operand, or `()` if the final operand is omitted. | ||
|
|
||
| ```rust | ||
| # fn fn_call() {} | ||
|
|
@@ -63,6 +63,48 @@ assert_eq!(5, five); | |
| > [!NOTE] | ||
| > As a control flow expression, if a block expression is the outer expression of an expression statement, the expected type is `()` unless it is followed immediately by a semicolon. | ||
|
|
||
| r[expr.block.type.diverging] | ||
| A block is itself considered to be [diverging](../divergence.md) if all reachable control flow paths contain a [diverging expression](../divergence.md#r-divergence.diverging-expressions), unless that expression is a place expression that is not read from. | ||
|
|
||
| ```rust | ||
| # #![ feature(never_type) ] | ||
| # fn make<T>() -> T { loop {} } | ||
| let no_control_flow: ! = { | ||
| // There are no conditional statements, so this entire block is diverging. | ||
| loop {} | ||
| }; | ||
|
Comment on lines
+70
to
+75
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. You and I had talked about this. We had both thought, "maybe it's worth using the nightly never type to express this more clearly." I had mentioned I'd need to talk it over with @ehuss. In that discussion, @ehuss made a good point: why not just use functions? I.e., for the expression whose type we want to demonstrate, we can make that the trailing expression of a function that returns fn no_control_flow() -> ! {
loop {}
}That does seem likely the best approach. Sound right to you? |
||
|
|
||
| let control_flow_diverging: ! = { | ||
| // All paths are diverging, so this entire block is diverging. | ||
| if true { | ||
| loop {} | ||
| } else { | ||
| loop {} | ||
| } | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| let control_flow_not_diverging: () = { | ||
| // Some paths are not diverging, so this entire block is not diverging. | ||
| if true { | ||
| () | ||
| } else { | ||
| loop {} | ||
| } | ||
| }; | ||
|
|
||
| struct Foo { | ||
| x: !, | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| let foo = Foo { x: make() }; | ||
| let diverging_place_not_read: () = { | ||
| let _: () = { | ||
| // Asssignment to `_` means the place is not read | ||
| let _ = foo.x; | ||
| }; | ||
| }; | ||
|
Comment on lines
+95
to
+105
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This compiles and produces an infinite loop. But then, so does: let foo = Foo { x: make() };
let diverging_place_not_read: () = {
let _: () = {
// Asssignment to something other than `_` means?
let _x = foo.x;
};
};Is there a way to demonstrate this such that
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. To answer the question posed, this compiles: trait RetId { type Ty; }
impl<T> RetId for fn() -> T { type Ty = T; }
struct S<T> {
x: T,
}
fn f(x: S<<fn() -> ! as RetId>::Ty>) -> ! {
let _x = x.x; // OK.
}But this does not: fn f(x: S<<fn() -> ! as RetId>::Ty>) -> ! {
let _ = x.x; // ERROR: Mismatched types.
}This is one, though, where it's not immediately coming to mind how to express this without either the never type or the never type hack.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Here's one way. (Of course, this is really just another instantiation of the never type hack.) fn phantom_call<T>(_: impl FnOnce(T) -> T) {}
let _ = phantom_call(|x| -> ! {
let _x = x; // OK.
});
let _ = phantom_call(|x| -> ! {
let _ = x; // ERROR: Mismatched types.
});
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It's interesting how it really does need the struct W<T>(T);
let x = W(loop {});
let _ = || -> ! {
let _x = x.0; // ERROR.
};Any thoughts about the reason for that?
traviscross marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| r[expr.block.value] | ||
| Blocks are always [value expressions] and evaluate the last operand in value expression context. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -96,6 +96,27 @@ Every binding in each `|` separated pattern must appear in all of the patterns i | |
| r[expr.match.binding-restriction] | ||
| Every binding of the same name must have the same type, and have the same binding mode. | ||
|
|
||
| r[expr.match.type] | ||
| The type of the overall `match` expression is the [least upper bound](../type-coercions.md#r-coerce.least-upper-bound) of the individual match arms. | ||
|
Comment on lines
+99
to
+100
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. If we're inlining the rule about determining the type based on the LUB for match, from https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.90.0/reference/type-coercions.html#r-coerce.least-upper-bound.intro, probably we'd need to do that for the other rules there also (and then either remove the list from there or convert it to an admonition or index).
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. As an aside, looking into this rule is what prompted me to file: |
||
|
|
||
| r[expr.match.empty] | ||
| If there are no match arms, then the `match` expression is diverging and the type is [`!`](../types/never.md). | ||
|
|
||
| r[expr.match.conditional] | ||
| If either the scrutinee expression or all of the match arms diverge, then the entire `match` expression also diverges. | ||
|
|
||
| > [!NOTE] | ||
| > Even if the entire `match` expression diverges, its type may not be [`!`](../types/never.md). | ||
| > | ||
| >```rust,compile_fail,E0004 | ||
| > let a = match true { | ||
| > true => Some(panic!()), | ||
| > false => None, | ||
| > }; | ||
| > // Fails to compile because `a` has the type `Option<!>`. | ||
| > match a {} | ||
| >``` | ||
|
|
||
| r[expr.match.guard] | ||
| ## Match guards | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We try to keep the number of top-level chapters contained. Looking at it, perhaps most of what's here that can't be inlined on the pages for each expression would make sense appearing in the Expressions chapter (e.g., we talk about place and value expressions there -- the verbiage about when a place expression is diverging might make sense near that) and in the Never type chapter.