EvaluatedToUnknown -> EvaluatedToAmbigStackDependent, EvaluatedToRecur -> EvaluatedToErrStackDependent

[compiler-errors]

Less confusing names, since the only difference between them and their parallel EvalutedTo.. is that they are stack dependent.

r? lcnr

[compiler-errors]

This doesn't seem to agree with the ordering, unless I am misunderstanding what "implies" means in both the positive and negative case.

[lcnr]

yeah, it seems wrong.

Though unifying EvaluatedToAmbigStackDependent and EvaluatedToAmbig should result in EvaluatedToAmbigStackDependent 🤔 at least when unifying the result of multiple nested goals

I believe the comment to be right and the order here to be wrong 🤔

[compiler-errors]

Yes I thought so too.

[lcnr]

r=me idk how we should deal with this comment

[lcnr]

yeah, it seems wrong.

Though unifying EvaluatedToAmbigStackDependent and EvaluatedToAmbig should result in EvaluatedToAmbigStackDependent 🤔 at least when unifying the result of multiple nested goals

I believe the comment to be right and the order here to be wrong 🤔

[compiler-errors]

@bors r=lcnr

gonna just leave the comment :>

[bors]

📌 Commit d732c3b has been approved by lcnr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[compiler-errors]

@bors rollup

[bors]

⌛ Testing commit d732c3b with merge f90f898...

[bors]

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: lcnr
Pushing f90f898 to master...

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (f90f898): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

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)	2.1%	[0.5%, 5.1%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.5%	[-1.5%, -1.5%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.1%	[-2.1%, -2.1%]	1
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.6%	[-1.5%, 5.1%]	5

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
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.6%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.6%	[-0.6%, -0.6%]	1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 675.831s -> 675.32s (-0.08%)
Artifact size: 314.22 MiB -> 314.18 MiB (-0.01%)