thread 'rustc' panicked at 'expected NodeId to be lowered already for res Local(NodeId(2240),

[dan-fritchman]

Thanks for everyone's work here.
This is a compiler panic generated when (invalidly) trying to use the experimental "if let chaining" feature.

I see it's experimental, and my code shouldn't work, but the compiler nonetheless (nicely) asked to file a report of its crash.

Meta

rustc --version --verbose:

$ rustc --version --verbose 
rustc 1.55.0-dev
binary: rustc
commit-hash: unknown
commit-date: unknown
host: x86_64-apple-darwin
release: 1.55.0-dev
LLVM version: 12.0.1

Error output

warning: build failed, waiting for other jobs to finish...
error[E0658]: `let` expressions in this position are experimental
   --> layout21raw/src/lib.rs:717:28
    |
717 |                         if let Some(pname) = &elem.net && pname != textelem.string {
    |                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    |
    = note: see issue #53667 <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/53667> for more information

thread 'rustc' panicked at 'expected `NodeId` to be lowered already for res Local(
    NodeId(2240),
)', compiler/rustc_ast_lowering/src/lib.rs:714:17
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace

error: internal compiler error: unexpected panic

note: the compiler unexpectedly panicked. this is a bug.

note: we would appreciate a bug report: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/new?labels=C-bug%2C+I-ICE%2C+T-compiler&template=ice.md

note: rustc 1.51.0 (2fd73fabe 2021-03-23) running on x86_64-apple-darwin

note: compiler flags: -C embed-bitcode=no -C debuginfo=2 -C incremental

note: some of the compiler flags provided by cargo are hidden

query stack during panic:
end of query stack
error: aborting due to previous error

For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0658`.
error: build failed

[klensy]

Something wrong with versions:

release: 1.55.0-dev

note: rustc 1.51.0 (2fd73fa 2021-03-23) running on x86_64-apple-darwin

[hellow554]

Seems to be a dup of #82290 which already has been fixed.

@JohnTitor can you close this please? :)