How to put a future in Pin<Box<>> without .boxed()?

[Ploppz]

I cannot use .boxed() because it triggers errors about "one type is more general than the other".
So I use Box::pin() instead which works fine. However, the reason I use box at all here is that I need to reduce the type size of the future because I hit the compiler limit, so I need to cast it to Box<Pin<dyn ..>> I suppose? Will that help?

But it seems I cannot escape my fate which is "one type is more general than the other": https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&edition=2018&gist=c0b057e9f9f6b9be9e064c3d68f57676 (edit: wrong link)

I have been wrestling with these errors almost a whole week and I'm desperate for a solution. Please help

[kornel]

I must admit, the error message is utterly confusing. I think it's worth filing a bug about it.

Removing this line makes it compile:

.then(move |x| async move {x})

[Ploppz]

I know that removing that line solves the problem, and I forgot to say: this is a very reduced test case deriving from a larger application where I actually need the then call, but where I do something more, namely

        .then(move |x| async move {
            delay_for(Duration::from_secs(some_time)).await;
            x
        })

[najamelan]

There is an issue already:

Unhelpful error "one type is more general than the other" in async code

Some threads from the user forum:

It seems it's sometimes related to lifetimes of the closure. Sometimes you can work around that with a dedicated function on which you can set for<'a>, although nobody has posted an example of that I think.

In the last thread it seems to be related to Send.

One type is more general than the other

I have an async fn that returns a value I pass to Tokio's tokio::spawn() that compiled, but had a bug. Trying to fix the bug by modifying a statement in the function caused the program to not compile anymore. I'm using the alpha version of Tokio (the one that supports async/.await). The error is: error[E0308]: mismatched types --> src/wormhole.rs:55:9 | 55 | tokio::spawn(session); | ^^^^^^^^^^^^ one type is more general than the other | = note: expected type tokio_io::io:…

[Solved] "one type is more general than the other", but they are exactly the same

Writing agent_factory as _, I get the same error as before. What I did was: let exp = CoverageExperiment::new(agent_factory as _, domain_factory, episode_length); One thing I find strange is that I have had no such problem with domain_factory, which is Box<dyn Fn() -> D>. (created like this: let domain_factory = Box::new(Env::default);) I will write a minimal test case when I have time.

Strange Compile Error, async-std + futures, one type is more general than the other

It compiled when I change some code. use futures; use futures::{StreamExt}; use async_std::prelude::*; use async_std::task; use std::time::Duration; use async_std::sync::RwLock; use futures::channel::mpsc::{UnboundedSender, UnboundedReceiver, unbounded}; async fn test() { let state = &RwLock::new(5i32); let (query_tx, query_rx) = unbounded::<i32>(); let (tx, rx) = unbounded::<i32>(); let task_write = async { for i in 1..5 { query_tx.unbounded_send(i).unwr…