Restrict the Termination impls to simplify stabilization #48497
Conversation
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
| /// This is ridiculously unstable, as it's a completely-punted-upon part | ||
| /// of the `?`-in-`main` RFC. It's here only to allow experimenting with | ||
| /// returning a code directly from main. It will definitely change | ||
| /// drastically before being stabilized, if it doesn't just get deleted. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Huh. Maybe we should #[doc(hidden)] it?
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #48510) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
scottmcm
force-pushed
the
more-restricted-termination
branch
from
48d957e
to
bc4d805
Compare
|
@nikomatsakis: Rebased atop #48143 |
Make a minimal commitment for stabilization. More impls are likely in future, but are not necessary at this time.
scottmcm
force-pushed
the
more-restricted-termination
branch
from
bc4d805
to
e20f7b2
Compare
| @@ -1080,6 +1080,15 @@ impl fmt::Display for ExitStatus { | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| /// This is ridiculously unstable, as it's a completely-punted-upon part | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't really care, but I feel like this is overstating the case. Specifying an exit code doesn't seem so "wild and crazy" to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's not what I meant, but I can see what you mean after rereading. I'll make a follow-up PR weakening the language here.
I definitely agree that fn main() -> ExitCode is valuable. I only intended the statement to be about the precise form of this type, since it's not B-RFC-Approved and thus even more subject to change than usual.
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit e20f7b2 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
…n, r=nikomatsakis Restrict the Termination impls to simplify stabilization Make a minimal commitment in preparation for stabilization. More impls, or broader ones, are likely in future, but are not necessary at this time and are more controversial. cc rust-lang#48453 (comment) r? @nikomatsakis
…n, r=nikomatsakis Restrict the Termination impls to simplify stabilization Make a minimal commitment in preparation for stabilization. More impls, or broader ones, are likely in future, but are not necessary at this time and are more controversial. cc rust-lang#48453 (comment) r? @nikomatsakis
…crichton Better docs and associated SUCCESS/FAILURE for process::ExitCode Follow-up to rust-lang#48497 (comment), since that PR was the minimal thing to unblock rust-lang#48453 (comment). r? @nikomatsakis
|
I know this is pretty old but I'm surprised there is a hard-coded English word (»Error«) in the output implemented here. That's obviously pretty bad for every non-English use-case. |
Make a minimal commitment in preparation for stabilization. More impls, or broader ones, are likely in future, but are not necessary at this time and are more controversial.
cc #48453 (comment)
r? @nikomatsakis