The bug in the OP is about UNconditional impl. And honestly, looks like very standard code, definitely something that could've been written for real. I can't even explain why it passes checks, it clearly shouldn't.
replyThis code, from the bug submission?
reply impl<T: 'static + Send> Drop for Q<T> {
fn drop(&mut self) { if let Some(t) = self.0.take() { KEPT.lock().unwrap().push(Box::new(t)); } }
}
You cannot write a type which conditionally implements Drop: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&editio...
reply struct Q<T>(Option<T>);
impl<T: 'static> Drop for Q<T> {
fn drop(&mut self) {}
}
error[E0367]: `Drop` impl requires `T: 'static` but the struct it is implemented for does not
--> src/main.rs:3:9
|
3 | impl<T: 'static> Drop for Q<T> {
| ^^^^^^^
|
note: the implementor must specify the same requirement
--> src/main.rs:1:1
|
1 | struct Q<T>(Option<T>);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^Even if the bounds are the same on the struct and the impl, it's still true that placing bounds on the Drop impl means it's not implemented for all T (just all T that also satisfy Q).
replyYou also don't have to place those bounds on the Drop impl just because they're on Q, that's not an error.