Skip to content

Conversation

@mark-i-m
Copy link
Contributor

cc rust-lang/rust#41686

These were the only ones I could find from a quick search, but please let me know if there are others.

cc @Centril

@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Sep 17, 2018

We should probably also document the change itself in the reference, i.e. that in Rust 2015 it is like this, and in Rust 2018 it is like that.

LGTM otherwise -- I defer to you on coverage =)

Copy link
Contributor

@Havvy Havvy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These changes are good, but doesn't document the RFC. Thanks!

@mark-i-m
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Havvy are you telling me "LGTM, except you should document the RFC" or "LGTM, please don't document the RFC"?

@Havvy Havvy merged commit 5e5be5a into rust-lang:master Sep 18, 2018
@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Sep 18, 2018

Before we close the tracking issue we need to document the changes themselves :)

@Havvy
Copy link
Contributor

Havvy commented Sep 18, 2018

Typo (from phone). Also meant to merge but failed to do so when I wrote it. If the RFC actually makes it an error, it should be documented. We dont have any policy in place yet for depreciations, though one could be suggested with a PR.

@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Sep 18, 2018

The RFC did not specify the migration strategy; but the language team resolved it in favor of making it a hard error in Rust 2018 and that is what the compiler does when you enable edition 2018.

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.

3 participants