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

Clean up const-hack PRs now that const if / match exist. #67657

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Dec 30, 2019

Conversation

@jumbatm
Copy link
Contributor

jumbatm commented Dec 27, 2019

Closes #67627.

Cleans up these merged PRs tagged with const-hack:

reverting their contents to have the match or if expressions they originally contained.

r? @oli-obk

There's one more PR in those tagged with const-hack that originally wasn't merged (#65107). Reading the thread, it looks like it was originally closed because the const-hack for the checked arithmetic non-negligibly hurt performance, and because there was no way to manipulate the returned Option at compile time anyway (with neither const if nor const match). Would you like me to add these changes to the changes from this PR here too, now that we have the necessary features?

@rust-highfive

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator

rust-highfive commented Dec 27, 2019

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @oli-obk (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 Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed.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.

@oli-obk

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Dec 27, 2019

Would you like me to add these changes to the changes from this PR here too, now that we have the necessary features?

Nah, if that is a new feature, we should do it in a separate PR, and this is in fact already happening: #66884

@oli-obk

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Dec 27, 2019

lgtm, but

r? @Centril

for the allow_internal_unstable(const_if)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive assigned Centril and unassigned oli-obk Dec 27, 2019
@jumbatm jumbatm force-pushed the jumbatm:cleanup-const-hack branch from 6dd3efc to 91c2f78 Dec 27, 2019
@Centril

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

Centril commented Dec 29, 2019

@bors r=oli-obk

@bors

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 29, 2019

📌 Commit 91c2f78 has been approved by oli-obk

JohnTitor added a commit to JohnTitor/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 30, 2019
Clean up const-hack PRs now that const if / match exist.

Closes rust-lang#67627.

Cleans up these merged PRs tagged with `const-hack`:

- rust-lang#63810
- rust-lang#63786
- rust-lang#61635
- rust-lang#58044

reverting their contents to have the match or if expressions they originally contained.

r? @oli-obk

There's one more PR in those tagged with `const-hack` that originally wasn't merged (rust-lang#65107). Reading the thread, it looks like it was originally closed because the `const-hack` for the checked arithmetic non-negligibly hurt performance, and because there was no way to manipulate the returned Option at compile time anyway (with neither const if nor const match). Would you like me to add these changes to the changes from this PR here too, now that we have the necessary features?
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 30, 2019
Rollup of 10 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - #64273 (Stabilize attribute macros on inline modules)
 - #67287 (typeck: note other end-point when checking range pats)
 - #67564 (docs: Iterator adapters have unspecified results after a panic)
 - #67622 (Some keyword documentation.)
 - #67657 (Clean up const-hack PRs now that const if / match exist.)
 - #67677 (resolve: Minor cleanup of duplicate macro reexports)
 - #67687 (Do not ICE on lifetime error involving closures)
 - #67698 (Move reachable_set and diagnostic_items to librustc_passes.)
 - #67701 (tidy: Enforce formatting rather than just check it if `--bless` is specified)
 - #67715 (Typo fix)

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@bors bors merged commit 91c2f78 into rust-lang:master Dec 30, 2019
4 checks passed
4 checks passed
pr Build #20191227.16 succeeded
Details
pr (Linux mingw-check) Linux mingw-check succeeded
Details
pr (Linux x86_64-gnu-llvm-7) Linux x86_64-gnu-llvm-7 succeeded
Details
pr (Linux x86_64-gnu-tools) Linux x86_64-gnu-tools succeeded
Details
anp added a commit to anp/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 5, 2020
The same problem as in rust-lang#65023 was
introduced by rust-lang#67657. This works
around the current incrcomp issue with these attributes by allowing it
here.
anp added a commit to anp/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 5, 2020
The same problem as in rust-lang#65023 was
introduced by rust-lang#67657. This works
around the current incrcomp issue with these attributes by allowing it
here.
Centril added a commit to Centril/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 8, 2020
Fix incremental builds of core by allowing unused attribute.

I *think* that the same problem as in rust-lang#65023 was introduced by rust-lang#67657. This works around the current incrcomp issue with these attributes by allowing it here. This resolves the near-term issue for me, at least.
afnanenayet added a commit to afnanenayet/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 13, 2020
The same problem as in rust-lang#65023 was
introduced by rust-lang#67657. This works
around the current incrcomp issue with these attributes by allowing it
here.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.