Skip to content
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

regression: type annotations needed #135670

Open
BoxyUwU opened this issue Jan 18, 2025 · 3 comments
Open

regression: type annotations needed #135670

BoxyUwU opened this issue Jan 18, 2025 · 3 comments
Labels
I-prioritize Issue: Indicates that prioritization has been requested for this issue. needs-triage This issue may need triage. Remove it if it has been sufficiently triaged. regression-from-stable-to-beta Performance or correctness regression from stable to beta. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@BoxyUwU
Copy link
Member

BoxyUwU commented Jan 18, 2025

[INFO] [stdout] error[E0283]: type annotations needed
[INFO] [stdout]   --> src/bind_collector.rs:40:24
[INFO] [stdout]    |
[INFO] [stdout] 40 |         let metadata = D1Backend::metadata(metadata_lookup);
[INFO] [stdout]    |                        ^^^^^^^^^ cannot infer type for type parameter `ST` declared on the trait `HasSqlType`
[INFO] [stdout]    |
[INFO] [stdout]    = note: cannot satisfy `D1Backend: HasSqlType<_>`
@BoxyUwU BoxyUwU added regression-from-stable-to-beta Performance or correctness regression from stable to beta. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jan 18, 2025
@rustbot rustbot added I-prioritize Issue: Indicates that prioritization has been requested for this issue. needs-triage This issue may need triage. Remove it if it has been sufficiently triaged. labels Jan 18, 2025
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

This seems to have regressed in 604d669 #132325

cc @lcnr, though I'll check if we mentioend this as a breakage in that pr or if crater missed it or something

@theemathas
Copy link
Contributor

If I'm reading that PR's thread correctly, it seems that crater had some issue that made it not properly test some crates, but then the PR got merged anyway for some reason.

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

Yep, there was a period of time when we were getting a lot of "unknown" crater results. That was fixed sometime later, and we didn't realize that it caused a bunch of false negatives until after.

I think this is probably worth still breaking, though perhaps lcnr can characterize in a more clear way why this broke and why it's consistent to break it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
I-prioritize Issue: Indicates that prioritization has been requested for this issue. needs-triage This issue may need triage. Remove it if it has been sufficiently triaged. regression-from-stable-to-beta Performance or correctness regression from stable to beta. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants