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

Well-formedness rules for fn-def types #99

Open
Tracked by #98
nikomatsakis opened this issue Sep 14, 2022 · 1 comment
Open
Tracked by #98

Well-formedness rules for fn-def types #99

nikomatsakis opened this issue Sep 14, 2022 · 1 comment

Comments

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor

nikomatsakis commented Sep 14, 2022

We need tests that fn-def types are well-formed (and maybe code?). To be well-formed, the where-clauses on the fn must be met. (That said, in the MIR type checker, I am currently adding in implications that will basically always make this true.)

@nikomatsakis nikomatsakis changed the title Well-formedness rules: We need tests that fn-def types are well-formed (and maybe code?). To be well-formed, the where-clauses on the fn must be met. (That said, in the MIR type checker, I am currently adding in implications that will basically always make this true.) Well-formedness rules for fn-def types Sep 14, 2022
@shua
Copy link
Contributor

shua commented Jul 2, 2024

I may have addressed this with #181 . At least, the type parameters are validated there, the function body is still not checked.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants