Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use try!() instead of ? operator, for older compilers #752

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 16, 2016

Conversation

matthiasbeyer
Copy link
Contributor

This is a proposal.

Some distros (yes, I'm using the distro rustc because my distro has some benefits over using the rustup infrastructure) do not yet have the newest compiler.

I therefor propose to stay with try!() instead of ? for maybe two weeks or so, maybe even a bit more, until all distros have updated their version of rustc.

@matthiasbeyer
Copy link
Contributor Author

appveyor failed because of a (?) compiler bug?

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Nov 16, 2016

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 91.233% when pulling 62e6a1e on matthiasbeyer:revert-qmark-operator into 4181a98 on kbknapp:master.

@BurntSushi
Copy link
Contributor

Maybe this was just missed in 7cb44ab?

See also: #740

@matthiasbeyer
Copy link
Contributor Author

It seems to be removed in 7cb44ab as well, but the ? is also still in master... ➰

@kbknapp
Copy link
Member

kbknapp commented Nov 16, 2016

Ah yep that one was just missed when I was fixing merge conflicts from the earlier revert! Thanks for catching it! @homu r+

@homu
Copy link
Contributor

homu commented Nov 16, 2016

📌 Commit 62e6a1e has been approved by kbknapp

homu added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2016
Use try!() instead of ? operator, for older compilers

This is a proposal.

Some distros (yes, I'm using the distro rustc because my distro has some benefits over using the rustup infrastructure) do not yet have the newest compiler.

I therefor propose to stay with `try!()` instead of `?` for maybe two weeks or so, maybe even a bit more, until all distros have updated their version of `rustc`.
@homu
Copy link
Contributor

homu commented Nov 16, 2016

⌛ Testing commit 62e6a1e with merge 5536af0...

homu added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 16, 2016
Use try!() instead of ? operator, for older compilers

This is a proposal.

Some distros (yes, I'm using the distro rustc because my distro has some benefits over using the rustup infrastructure) do not yet have the newest compiler.

I therefor propose to stay with `try!()` instead of `?` for maybe two weeks or so, maybe even a bit more, until all distros have updated their version of `rustc`.
@homu
Copy link
Contributor

homu commented Nov 16, 2016

💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.

@homu
Copy link
Contributor

homu commented Nov 16, 2016

📌 Commit 62e6a1e has been approved by kbknapp

@homu
Copy link
Contributor

homu commented Nov 16, 2016

☀️ Test successful - status

@homu
Copy link
Contributor

homu commented Nov 16, 2016

👀 Test was successful, but fast-forwarding failed: 422 Required status check "coverage/coveralls" is pending.

@kbknapp kbknapp merged commit 192a808 into clap-rs:master Nov 16, 2016
@matthiasbeyer matthiasbeyer deleted the revert-qmark-operator branch November 16, 2016 21:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants