Introduce Unnormalized wrapper

[adwinwhite]

View all comments

This is the first step of the eager normalization series.

This PR introduce an Unnormalized wrapper and make most normalization routines consume it. The purpose is to make normalization explicit.
This PR contains no behavior change.

API changes are in the first two commit.
There're some normalization routines left untouched:

• normalize in the type checker of borrowck: better do it together with field.ty() returning Unnormalized.
• normalize_with_depth: only used inside the old solver. Can be done later.
• query_normalize: rarely used.
• misc local normalization helpers.

The compiler errors are mostly fixed via ast-grep, with exceptions handled manually.

[adwinwhite]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[adwinwhite]

@bors try cancel

[rust-bors]

Try build cancelled. Cancelled workflows:

• https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/actions/runs/24231666610

[adwinwhite]

@bors try @rust-timer queue

[rust-bors]

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 10d0ef4 (10d0ef4e7995ca1d162f402be9f0b39b15d7a78a, parent: 7659cec4ed1457bc0d1f636127e66e8fe5008928)

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (10d0ef4): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking means the PR may be perf-sensitive. It's automatically marked not fit for rolling up. Overriding is possible but disadvised: it risks changing compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -2.4%, secondary -6.4%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-2.4%	[-2.4%, -2.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-6.4%	[-6.4%, -6.4%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-2.4%	[-2.4%, -2.4%]	1

Cycles

Results (secondary -0.7%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.4%	[2.1%, 2.7%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.7%	[-3.8%, -3.6%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 492.281s -> 489.321s (-0.60%)
Artifact size: 395.57 MiB -> 395.56 MiB (-0.00%)

[adwinwhite]

r? @lcnr

[lcnr]

final nit pls cleanup commit history, then r=me

View changes since this review

[lcnr]

@bors rollup=never

[adwinwhite]

final nit pls cleanup commit history

Should I just squash or isolate the API change in one commit for this big PR?

Also unsure why I can't reply to single inline review. If you missed it,
skip_norm_wip after explicit_super_predicates_of is unavoidable.
See comment

[lcnr]

Should I just squash or isolate the API change in one commit for this big PR?

whatever u prefer, as long as the "address review" commits are gone :3

[lcnr]

r=me

[adwinwhite]

@bors r=lcnr

[rust-bors]

📌 Commit a73a9c7 has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[rustbot]

This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

[adwinwhite]

Increase priority to avoid repeated merge conflict.

@bors r=lcnr p=1

[rust-bors]

📌 Commit 6279106 has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: lcnr
Duration: 3h 19m 8s
Pushing e22c616 to main...