Emits non-overlapping suggestions for arguments with wrong types

[mu001999]

Fixes #109831

[rustbot]

r? @compiler-errors

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

[compiler-errors]

Can you leave a bit more information of what this PR is doing, either in the PR description or in the comments in the code itself? The logic is pretty dense already, and I'm really not sure what this exactly fixes.

[mu001999]

@compiler-errors This check suggests expected types for arguments with wrong types, but relies on the idx (prev) of previous arguments with expected types.

In the previous logic, prev would only be updated only when meeting arguments with expected types, and the wrong arguments between them would share an idx (prev + 1), which would result in overlapping suggestions and the debug assertions would fail.

This PR fixes it through updating the prev after each suggestions, which makes suggestions not overlapped.

[mu001999]

r? @estebank

I found the author of this snippet ;)

[estebank]

@bors r+

[bors]

📌 Commit 80e4285 has been approved by estebank

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit 80e4285 with merge b80ee39...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: estebank
Pushing b80ee39 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (b80ee39): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.2%	[1.2%, 1.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.4%	[-0.4%, -0.4%]	1

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	4.0%	[1.0%, 7.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-3.5%	[-3.5%, -3.5%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.5%]	2

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.5%	[0.4%, 0.7%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.7%	[2.5%, 2.9%]	3
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-0.5%, -0.5%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-4.4%	[-5.2%, -3.5%]	4
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.2%	[-0.5%, 0.7%]	3