Check for lifetime uses in closures as well #14608
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
The `BodyLifetimeChecker` which checks for the use of any non-anonymous non-static lifetime did not recurse into closures, missing lifetime uses. This would lead to a bogus elision suggestion. The `BodyLifetimeChecker` is not refined enough to avoid false positives, as any conforming lifetime, including one coming from the outer context, would be considered a hit. The number of false positives might increase now that we check closures as well, in case those closures define and use lifetimes themselves.
samueltardieu
force-pushed
the
issue14607
branch
from
509701b to
77b3ac3
Compare
dswij
approved these changes
Apr 17, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The
BodyLifetimeCheckerwhich checks for the use of any non-anonymous non-static lifetime did not recurse into closures, missing lifetime uses. This would lead to a bogus elision suggestion.The
BodyLifetimeCheckeris not refined enough to avoid false positives, as any conforming lifetime, including one coming from the outer context, would be considered a hit. The number of false positives might increase now that we check closures as well, in case those closures define and use lifetimes themselves.changelog: [
needless_lifetimes]: do not suggest removing a lifetime which is later used in a closureFixes #14607