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

Jump to bottom

remove usage of vecs_implicitly_copyable #6421

Closed
thestinger opened this issue May 11, 2013 · 0 comments
Closed

remove usage of vecs_implicitly_copyable #6421

thestinger opened this issue May 11, 2013 · 0 comments
Labels
C-cleanup Category: PRs that clean code up or issues documenting cleanup.

Comments

@thestinger
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@alexcrichton alexcrichton mentioned this issue May 12, 2013
Closed
bors added a commit that referenced this issue May 14, 2013
@bors
auto merge of #6434 : alexcrichton/rust/less-implicit-vecs, r=bstrie
767e3ae 
This closes #5204 and #6421.

This also removes the `vecs_implicitly_copyable` lint (although now reading #6421, this may not be desired?). If we want to leave it in, it at least removes it from the compiler.
flip1995 pushed a commit to flip1995/rust that referenced this issue Dec 6, 2020
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#6421 - xFrednet:4176-unreadable-literal-lint-…
c1664c5 
…fractal-option, r=Manishearth

Added a lint-fraction-readability flag to the configuration

This adds an option to disable the `unreadable_literal` lint for floats with a longer fraction. This allows users to write `0.100200300` without getting a warning. Fixes rust-lang#4176

I have some open questions about this PR:
1. I've named the option `lint-fraction-readability` is this a good name or should I rename it to something else?
2. What should the default configuration value be?
    * The current default value is `true` as this was also the previous default.
3. Do I have to document this new option somewhere else or will it be extracted from the code comment?
4. The current fix option will also rewrite the fraction if the integer part violates the `unreadable_literal` lint it would otherwise also trigger the `inconsistent_digit_grouping` lint. Is this also okay?
    * `1.100200300` will be unaffected by the fix function
    * `100200300.100200300` will be effected and fixed to `100_200_300.100_200_300`

---

The project needed some getting used to but I'm happy with the result. A big thank you to `@flip1995` for giving me some pointers for this implementation and to everyone for the great introduction documentation!

---

changelog: Added the `unreadable-literal-lint-fractions` configuration to disable the `unreadable_literal` lint for fractions
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
C-cleanup Category: PRs that clean code up or issues documenting cleanup.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@alexcrichton @thestinger