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

Show default values for debug-assertions & debug-assertions-std #72382

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 22, 2020

Conversation

tmiasko
Copy link
Contributor

@tmiasko tmiasko commented May 20, 2020

No description provided.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @nikomatsakis (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 Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed.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 May 20, 2020
@@ -312,11 +312,11 @@

# Whether or not debug assertions are enabled for the compiler and standard
# library.
#debug-assertions = false
#debug-assertions = debug
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this legal syntax if you uncomment it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is invalid when uncommented. But I think it is valuable to indicate how default value is obtained, and similar approach is already used for other options.

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor

Hmm, ok. I agree it's useful though I'm surprised we would permit syntax that can't be uncommented. But if we follow the same approach elsewhere, seems ok.

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+ rollup=always

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 21, 2020

📌 Commit 6778c7a has been approved by nikomatsakis

@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 May 21, 2020
RalfJung added a commit to RalfJung/rust that referenced this pull request May 21, 2020
…s, r=nikomatsakis

Show default values for debug-assertions & debug-assertions-std
RalfJung added a commit to RalfJung/rust that referenced this pull request May 21, 2020
…s, r=nikomatsakis

Show default values for debug-assertions & debug-assertions-std
This was referenced May 21, 2020
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 21, 2020
Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#72055 (Intern predicates)
 - rust-lang#72149 (Don't `type_of` on trait assoc ty without default)
 - rust-lang#72347 (Make intra-link resolve links for both trait and impl items)
 - rust-lang#72350 (Improve documentation of `slice::from_raw_parts`)
 - rust-lang#72382 (Show default values for debug-assertions & debug-assertions-std)
 - rust-lang#72421 (Fix anchor display when hovering impl)
 - rust-lang#72425 (fix discriminant_value sign extension)

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@bors bors merged commit 503a2fd into rust-lang:master May 22, 2020
@tmiasko tmiasko deleted the config-toml-debug-assertions branch May 22, 2020 15:07
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

4 participants