Skip to content

Fix a typo in the GAT post #1044

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 29, 2022
Merged

Fix a typo in the GAT post #1044

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
f959a09
Add "at"
slanterns Oct 28, 2022
3296943
Update posts/2022-10-28-gats-stabilization.md
Mark-Simulacrum Oct 29, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions posts/2022-10-28-gats-stabilization.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ fn main() {

Here, imagine we wanted to have a `LendingIterator` where the items are overlapping slices of an array. We also have a function `print_items` that prints every item of a `LendingIterator`, as long as they implement `Debug`. This all seems innocent enough, but the above code doesn't compile — even though it should. Without going into details here, the `for<'a> I::Item<'a>: Debug` currently implies that `I::Item<'a>` must outlive `'static`.

This is not really a nice bug. And of all the ones we'll mention today, this will likely be the one that is most limiting, annoying, and tough to figure out. This pops up much more often with GATs, but can be found with code that doesn't use GATs at all. Unfortunately, fixing this requires some refactorings to the compiler that isn't a short-term project. It is on the horizon though. The good news is that, in the meantime, we are least working on improving the error message you get from this code. This is what it will look like in the upcoming stabilization:
This is not really a nice bug. And of all the ones we'll mention today, this will likely be the one that is most limiting, annoying, and tough to figure out. This pops up much more often with GATs, but can be found with code that doesn't use GATs at all. Unfortunately, fixing this requires some refactorings to the compiler that isn't a short-term project. It is on the horizon though. The good news is that, in the meantime, we are working on improving the error message you get from this code. This is what it will look like in the upcoming stabilization:

```rust
error[E0597]: `array` does not live long enough
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -274,4 +274,4 @@ To conclude things, all the various people involved in getting this stabilizatio
[Iterator]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/iter/trait.Iterator.html
[tracking issue]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/44265
[stabilization pull request]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/96709
[chumsky_blog_post]: https://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps/blog/2022/06/27/many-modes-a-gats-pattern/
[chumsky_blog_post]: https://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps/blog/2022/06/27/many-modes-a-gats-pattern/