Effects and const condition checking

The HostEffect predicate

HostEffectPredicates are a kind of predicate from ~const Tr or const Tr bounds. It has a trait reference, and a constness which could be Maybe or Const depending on the bound. Because ~const Tr, or rather Maybe bounds apply differently based on whichever contexts they are in, they have different behavior than normal bounds. Where normal trait bounds on a function such as T: Tr are collected within the predicates_of query to be proven when a function is called and to be assumed within the function, bounds such as T: ~const Tr will behave as a normal trait bound and add T: Tr to the result from predicates_of, but also adds a HostEffectPredicate to the const_conditions query.

On the other hand, T: const Tr bounds do not change meaning across contexts, therefore they will result in HostEffect(T: Tr, const) being added to predicates_of, and not const_conditions.

The const_conditions query

predicates_of represents a set of predicates that need to be proven to use an item. For example, to use foo in the example below:

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
fn foo<T>() where T: Default {}
}

We must be able to prove that T implements Default. In a similar vein, const_conditions represents a set of predicates that need to be proven to use an item in const contexts. If we adjust the example above to use const trait bounds:

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
const fn foo<T>() where T: ~const Default {}
}

Then foo would get a HostEffect(T: Default, maybe) in the const_conditions query, suggesting that in order to call foo from const contexts, one must prove that T has a const implementation of Default.

Enforcement of const_conditions

const_conditions are currently checked in various places.

Every call in HIR from a const context (which includes const fn and const items) will check that const_conditions of the function we are calling hold. This is done in FnCtxt::enforce_context_effects. Note that we don't check if the function is only referred to but not called, as the following code needs to compile:

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
const fn hi<T: ~const Default>() -> T {
    T::default()
}
const X: fn() -> u32 = hi::<u32>;
}

For a trait impl to be well-formed, we must be able to prove the const_conditions of the trait from the impl's environment. This is checked in wfcheck::check_impl.

Here's an example:

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
const trait Bar {}
const trait Foo: ~const Bar {}
// `const_conditions` contains `HostEffect(Self: Bar, maybe)`

impl const Bar for () {}
impl const Foo for () {}
// ^ here we check `const_conditions` for the impl to be well-formed
}

Methods of trait impls must not have stricter bounds than the method of the trait that they are implementing. To check that the methods are compatible, a hybrid environment is constructed with the predicates of the impl plus the predicates of the trait method, and we attempt to prove the predicates of the impl method. We do the same for const_conditions:

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
const trait Foo {
    fn hi<T: ~const Default>();
}

impl<T: ~const Clone> Foo for Vec<T> {
    fn hi<T: ~const PartialEq>();
    // ^ we can't prove `T: ~const PartialEq` given `T: ~const Clone` and
    // `T: ~const Default`, therefore we know that the method on the impl
    // is stricter than the method on the trait.
}
}

These checks are done in compare_method_predicate_entailment. A similar function that does the same check for associated types is called compare_type_predicate_entailment. Both of these need to consider const_conditions when in const contexts.

In MIR, as part of const checking, const_conditions of items that are called are revalidated again in Checker::revalidate_conditional_constness.

explicit_implied_const_bounds on associated types and traits

Bounds on associated types, opaque types, and supertraits such as

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
trait Foo: ~const PartialEq {
    type X: ~const PartialEq;
}

fn foo() -> impl ~const PartialEq {
    // ^ unimplemented syntax
}
}

Have their bounds represented differently. Unlike const_conditions which need to be proved for callers, and can be assumed inside the definition (e.g. trait bounds on functions), these bounds need to be proved at definition (at the impl, or when returning the opaque) but can be assumed for callers. The non-const equivalent of these bounds are called explicit_item_bounds.

These bounds are checked in compare_impl_item::check_type_bounds for HIR typeck, evaluate_host_effect_from_item_bounds in the old solver and consider_additional_alias_assumptions in the new solver.

Proving HostEffectPredicates

HostEffectPredicates are implemented both in the old solver and the new trait solver. In general, we can prove a HostEffect predicate when either of these conditions are met:

• The predicate can be assumed from caller bounds;
• The type has a const impl for the trait, and that const conditions on the impl holds, and that the explicit_implied_const_bounds on the trait holds; or
• The type has a built-in implementation for the trait in const contexts. For example, Fn may be implemented by function items if their const conditions are satisfied, or Destruct is implemented in const contexts if the type can be dropped at compile time.