Rollup of 8 pull requests #67846
Closed
Rollup of 8 pull requests #67846
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The test checks that we reuse the CGU of a crate when the implementation details of an `extern crate` have changed. Signed-off-by: Michal Terepeta <michal.terepeta@gmail.com>
linkchecker is no longer run on the compiler docs so they can be removed from the whitelist.
- remove syntax::{help!, span_help!, span_note!}
- remove unused syntax::{struct_span_fatal, struct_span_err_or_warn!, span_err_or_warn!}
- lintify check_for_bindings_named_same_as_variants + conflicting_repr_hints
- inline syntax::{struct_span_warn!, diagnostic_used!}
- stringify_error_code! -> error_code! & use it more.
- find_plugin_registrar: de-fatalize an error
- de-fatalize metadata errors
- move type_error_struct! to rustc_typeck
- struct_span_err! -> rustc_errors
Suggest calling method when first argument is `self` Closes: rust-lang#66782 I've explored different approaches for this MR but I think the most straightforward is the best one. I've tried to find out if the methods for given type exist (to maybe have a better suggestion), but we don't collect them anywhere and collecting them is quite problematic. Moreover, collecting all the methods would require rewriting big part of the code and also could potentially include performance degradation, which I don't think is necessary for this simple case.
…akis no longer promote non-pattern const functions This is trying to pack-pedal a bit on promotion feature creep, as proposed by @eddyb [here](rust-lang/const-eval#19 (comment)): possibly, a sane subset of `const fn` that we could promote are those that are just constructors -- the same subset that we might want to allow in pattern position at some point. So, this removes the `rustc_promotable` attribute from the three functions they identified that do not fit this pattern. The first step is to run crater to see if there is code in the wild that relies on this being promotable. r? @oli-obk
…chenkov More reductions in error handling diversity In this follow up to rust-lang#67744, we: - Remove all fatal / error / warning macros in `syntax` except for `struct_span_err`, which is moved to `rustc_errors`. - Lintify some hard-coded warnings which used warning macros. - Defatalize some errors. In general, the goal here is to make it painful to use fatal or unstructured errors and so we hopefully won't see many of these creep in.
…sakis Add a test for rust-lang#37333 The test checks that we reuse the CGU of a crate when the implementation details of an `extern crate` have changed. Signed-off-by: Michal Terepeta <michal.terepeta@gmail.com>
…komatsakis Cleanup linkchecker whitelist linkchecker is no longer run on the compiler docs so they can be removed from the whitelist.
…r=Manishearth Implement uncommon_codepoints lint. Part of rust-lang#55467 . The checks of `$crate` and `{{root}}` are very unfortunate. But i'm not sure where they belongs to.
tweak wording of mismatched delimiter errors This PR improves the wording of the "incorrect delimiter" error messages. Here's a quick rationale: - *"un-closed" -> "unclosed"*: "unclosed" is valid English, so there's no need to hyphenate the prefix. This should be pretty uncontroversial, I think. - *"close delimiter" -> "closing delimiter"*: In my anecdotal experience, I've always heard "closing delimiter" or "closing parenthesis". In addition, the codebase already uses this terminology in comments and function names more than "close delimiter", which could indicate that it's more intuitive. - "incorrect delimiter" -> "mismatched delimiter": "Incorrect delimiter" is vague; why is it incorrect? "mismatched" clearly indicates why the delimiter is causing the error. r? @estebank
…i-obk Also remove const-hack for abs Closes rust-lang#67842. r? @oli-obk
|
@bors r+ p=8 rollup=never |
|
📌 Commit 3f83bc8 has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
|
⌛ Testing commit 3f83bc8 with merge d933e2f717fc60f05f6faa7a7f1754255be7841c... |
|
The job Click to expand the log.I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Successful merges:
self#66913 (Suggest calling method when first argument isself)Failed merges:
r? @ghost