[Draft] Supertrait item resolution in subtrait `impl`s #143527

dingxiangfei2009 · 2025-07-06T14:03:34Z

This is pertaining to implementable trait aliases, Deref/Receiver trait migration and supertrait items in subtrait impls.

This is a draft for the resolver and crate metadata changes. Through this patch, the resolver will pick up supertrait items, collected from the trait super-bounds and trait alias in a future extension. This information will be encoded so that the resolver can resolve names in the downstream crates.

I would like to post this draft earlier because there are already significant design changes, which may warrant collecting opinions ahead of time.

Next steps would be

teach hir-analysis to collect associated items in subtrait items into implied supertrait impls;
adapt the syntax so that associated items can be paths instead of just identifies today, because associate items on paths is essential for the disambiguation of the design.

rust-log-analyzer · 2025-07-06T14:09:15Z

The job tidy failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain enhanced) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

-    fn get_module_supertraits(self, id: DefIndex, sess: &'a Session) -> impl Iterator<Item = DefId> {
+    fn get_module_supertraits(
+        self,
+        id: DefIndex,
+        sess: &'a Session,
+    ) -> impl Iterator<Item = DefId> {
         let supertraits = self.root.tables.module_supertraits.get(self, id);
         supertraits.decode((self, sess)).into_iter()
     }
fmt: checked 6147 files
Build completed unsuccessfully in 0:00:44
  local time: Sun Jul  6 14:09:05 UTC 2025
  network time: Sun, 06 Jul 2025 14:09:06 GMT

dingxiangfei2009 · 2025-07-07T15:08:28Z

tests/ui/traits/super-subtraits/supertrait-in-subtrait-impl.rs

+impl Sub for S {
+    //~^ ERROR: the trait bound `S: Sup` is not satisfied
+    type A = ();
+    //~^ ERROR: the trait bound `S: Sup` is not satisfied


This is not the desired end game, yet. This is rather a demonstration that this patch allows name resolution to associate A with that from trait Sup correctly.

dingxiangfei2009 · 2025-07-07T15:15:46Z

cc @tmandry @tomassedovic

The patch is also to unblock arbitrary_self_types.

The next steps are

(before landing this patch) gate the supertrait behaviour behind #[rustc_supertrait_in_subtrait_impl]
Teach hir-analysis to generate an impl for supertraits
Mark Deref with a builtin attribute #[rustc_supertrait_in_subtrait_impl], move Target from Deref to Receiver
- Test the set up with crater

petrochenkov · 2025-07-10T12:41:09Z

compiler/rustc_ast/src/ast.rs

+    /// The source of this trait ref
+    /// and whether this trait ref should be regarded as
+    /// a nominal subtrait-supertrait relation.
+    pub source: TraitRefSource,


We probably don't need this in AST.
This flag is needed after HIR->Ty lowering, I guess, and instead of parser it's equally simple to calculate it at any stage before that (e.g. in AST->HIR lowering, or HIR->Ty lowering).

I see that PolyTraitRef is used in several AST nodes including dyn, where bounds and the trait superbounds. Where would a better place be, to record whether the trait superbound has the auto impl modifier?

How about switching out parse_generic_bounds parser in fn parse_item_trait and we record the supertrait modifier, ie. with auto impl or not, on the trait item level?

The auto impl modifier is in AST, yes.
Parser generally shouldn't be too context-sensitive and use things like in_supertrait_context, so it would typically parse auto impl everywhere and then later passes would reject it semantically in inappropriate positions.
Otherwise we have two separate but similar grammars for bound lists.

But for a prototype both ways are ok, and if we need to track in_supertrait_context in the parser anyway for auto impl, then we can store it into AST too.

petrochenkov · 2025-07-10T12:41:57Z

compiler/rustc_ast/src/visit.rs

    /// Super traits of a trait.
    /// E.g., `trait A: B`
-    SuperTraits,
+    SuperTraits { subtrait: LocalDefId },


LocalDefId shouldn't be a part of AST or AST visitors.
If it's needed by some specific visitor, it's better to pass it in some other way.

petrochenkov · 2025-07-10T12:44:04Z

compiler/rustc_parse/src/parser/ty.rs

        leading_token: &Token,
    ) -> PResult<'a, GenericBound> {
+        let auto_impl = if in_supertrait_context && self.eat_keyword(exp!(Auto)) {
+            self.expect_keyword(exp!(Impl))?;


What is auto impl Trait?
I don't see it in tests.
Is it a part of the "supertrait items in subtrait impls" feature, or some other related feature?

Yeah it was not included in the the "supertrait items in subtrait impls" feature but it is in the next proposal to handle the marker trait case.

Suppose that we have a marker trait trait Marker {} which has no associated items. The lang team discussion prefers the option to not automatically fill in an implicit impl Marker. Rather, we will first not fill it out and let the user to explicitly do impl Marker for .., unless the user writes trait Subtrait: auto impl Marker to allow the auto-impl.

petrochenkov · 2025-07-10T12:50:25Z

compiler/rustc_resolve/src/lib.rs

    traits: RefCell<Option<Box<[(Ident, NameBinding<'ra>)]>>>,

+    /// In case supertraits are relevant in the module, the DefIds are collected, too.
+    supertraits: RefCell<IndexSet<DefId>>,


I don't think this is necessary.
Since use ChildTrait::ItemFromParent; and similar do not work and are not supposed to work, the whole implementation can be localized to compiler\rustc_resolve\src\late.rs.

Perhaps as two passes in late resolver.
Since if the first (regular) pass we do not always have trait Parent late-resolved when late-resolving

trait Child: Parent { ... }

, but we may need trait Parent late-resolved here.
So maybe the first pass can just keep a hole and some bookkeeping, so that the hole can be filled in a second pass.

bors · 2025-07-14T02:53:10Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #143357) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

Dylan-DPC · 2025-09-28T09:44:55Z

@dingxiangfei2009 any updates on this? thanks

dingxiangfei2009 · 2025-10-01T11:48:31Z

@Dylan-DPC I suppose that I can close this first. rust-lang/rfcs#3851 has changed significantly since this PR was opened. The parser and AST has adapted so far that I believe it warrants a reboot in reviews.

I will open a new PR later and cross-reference this PR so that we can track the history.

draft for supertrait item in subtrait impls

e8af725

petrochenkov self-assigned this Jul 6, 2025

dingxiangfei2009 commented Jul 7, 2025

View reviewed changes

tomassedovic mentioned this pull request Jul 7, 2025

Getting Rust for Linux into stable Rust: language features rust-lang/rust-project-goals#116

Open

53 tasks

petrochenkov added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jul 7, 2025

petrochenkov reviewed Jul 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

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 Jul 10, 2025

dingxiangfei2009 closed this Oct 1, 2025

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. label Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

[Draft] Supertrait item resolution in subtrait impls #143527

[Draft] Supertrait item resolution in subtrait impls #143527

Uh oh!

Conversation

dingxiangfei2009 commented Jul 6, 2025

Uh oh!

rust-log-analyzer commented Jul 6, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dingxiangfei2009 commented Jul 7, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dingxiangfei2009 Jul 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

petrochenkov Jul 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bors commented Jul 14, 2025

Uh oh!

Dylan-DPC commented Sep 28, 2025

Uh oh!

dingxiangfei2009 commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

[Draft] Supertrait item resolution in subtrait `impl`s #143527

[Draft] Supertrait item resolution in subtrait `impl`s #143527

dingxiangfei2009 commented Jul 7, 2025 •

edited

Loading

dingxiangfei2009 Jul 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

petrochenkov Jul 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading