| // Test that we invoking `foo()` successfully resolves to the trait `Foo` |
| // (prompting the mismatched types error) but does not influence the choice |
| // of what kind of `Vec` we have, eventually leading to a type error. |
| |
| trait Foo { |
| fn foo(&self) -> isize; |
| } |
| |
| impl Foo for Vec<usize> { |
| fn foo(&self) -> isize {1} |
| } |
| |
| impl Foo for Vec<isize> { |
| fn foo(&self) -> isize {2} |
| } |
| |
| // This is very hokey: we have heuristics to suppress messages about |
| // type annotations needed. But placing these two bits of code into |
| // distinct functions, in this order, causes us to print out both |
| // errors I'd like to see. |
| |
| fn m1() { |
| // we couldn't infer the type of the vector just based on calling foo()... |
| let mut x = Vec::new(); |
| //~^ ERROR type annotations needed |
| x.foo(); |
| } |
| |
| fn m2() { |
| let mut x = Vec::new(); |
| |
| // ...but we still resolved `foo()` to the trait and hence know the return type. |
| let y: usize = x.foo(); //~ ERROR mismatched types |
| } |
| |
| fn main() { } |
