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

Fix #7217: Add support for rustc-flags without spaces between flags and values #7257

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Aug 19, 2019

Conversation

RobMor
Copy link
Contributor

@RobMor RobMor commented Aug 17, 2019

Hi, I believe this pull request contains a fix for issue #7217. This is my first pull request to any open source project, much less any Rust project. I'm not super familiar with Rust at the moment, so let me know if I should change anything. Also any help/advice you can give me about this PR would be much appreciated!

I do have some specific questions:

  • Is the test I added worthy of being its own test? I basically copied the one above it and remove the spaces between the flags and the values. Should I have added on to the test above it instead?
  • Would it be better if I directly unit-tested this function in some other test file?
  • Is the ureachable! macro good style?

@rust-highfive
Copy link

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @nrc (or someone else) soon.

If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Aug 17, 2019
@RobMor RobMor changed the title Fix #7217: Add support for pkg-config flags without spaces between flags and values Fix #7217: Add support for rustc-flags without spaces between flags and values Aug 17, 2019
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: r+

Thanks!

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Aug 19, 2019

📌 Commit a82de17 has been approved by alexcrichton

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 19, 2019
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Aug 19, 2019

⌛ Testing commit a82de17 with merge cfdf00e...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 19, 2019
Fix #7217: Add support for rustc-flags without spaces between flags and values

Hi, I believe this pull request contains a fix for issue #7217. This is my first pull request to any open source project, much less any Rust project. I'm not super familiar with Rust at the moment, so let me know if I should change anything. Also any help/advice you can give me about this PR would be much appreciated!

I do have some specific questions:
- Is the test I added worthy of being its own test? I basically copied the one above it and remove the spaces between the flags and the values. Should I have added on to the test above it instead?
- Would it be better if I directly unit-tested this function in some other test file?
- Is the `ureachable!` macro good style?
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Aug 19, 2019

☀️ Test successful - checks-azure
Approved by: alexcrichton
Pushing cfdf00e to master...

@bors bors merged commit a82de17 into rust-lang:master Aug 19, 2019
@ehuss ehuss added this to the 1.39.0 milestone Feb 6, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants