Rollup of 7 pull requests #83758
Closed
Rollup of 7 pull requests #83758
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
"spotlight" is not a very specific or self-explaining name. Additionally, the dialog that it triggers is called "Notable traits". So, "notable trait" is a better name. * Rename `#[doc(spotlight)]` to `#[doc(notable_trait)]` * Rename `#![feature(doc_spotlight)]` to `#![feature(doc_notable_trait)]` * Update documentation * Improve documentation
When other errors are generated, there can be a mismatch between the amount of input types in MIR, and the amount in the function itself. Break from the comparative loop if this is the case to prevent out-of-bounds.
test: add more cases test: add comments refine msg
Add a test that has the right input to trigger an out-of-bounds error when in MIR the local_decls and the normalized_input_tys don't match in amount.
…ebank Fix expected/found order on impl trait projection mismatch error fixes rust-lang#68561 This PR adds a new `ObligationCauseCode` used when checking the concrete type of an impl trait satisfies its bounds, and checks for that cause code in the existing test to see if a projection's normalized type should be the "expected" or "found" type. The second commit adds a `peel_derives` to that test, which appears to be necessary in some cases (see projection-mismatch-in-impl-where-clause.rs, which would still give expected/found in the wrong order otherwise). This caused some other changes in diagnostics not involving impl trait, but they look correct to me.
Rename `#[doc(spotlight)]` to `#[doc(notable_trait)]` Fixes rust-lang#80936. "spotlight" is not a very specific or self-explaining name. Additionally, the dialog that it triggers is called "Notable traits". So, "notable trait" is a better name. * Rename `#[doc(spotlight)]` to `#[doc(notable_trait)]` * Rename `#![feature(doc_spotlight)]` to `#![feature(doc_notable_trait)]` * Update documentation * Improve documentation r? `@Manishearth`
…matsakis add OR_PATTERNS_BACK_COMPAT lint close rust-lang#83318
…=nikomatsakis 2229: Fix diagnostic issue when using FakeReads in closures This PR fixes a diagnostic issue caused by rust-lang#82536. A temporary work around was used in this merged PR which involved feature gating the addition of FakeReads introduced as a result of pattern matching in closures. The fix involves adding an optional closure DefId to ForLet and ForMatchedPlace FakeReadCauses. This DefId will only be added if a closure pattern matches a Place starting with an Upvar. r? ``@nikomatsakis``
…r=nikomatsakis Break when there is a mismatch in the type count When other errors are generated, there can be a mismatch between the amount of input types in MIR, and the amount in the function itself. Break from the comparative loop if this is the case to prevent out-of-bounds. Fixes rust-lang#83499
Fix comment typo in once.rs I believe I came across a minor typo in a comment. I am not particularly familiar with this part of the codebase, but I have read the surrounding code as well as the referenced `park` and `unpark` functions, and I believe my proposed change is true to the intended meaning of the comment. I intentionally tried to keep the change as minimal as possible. If I have the maintainers' permission, I'd also love to add a comma to improve readability as follows: `Luckily ``park`` comes with the guarantee that if it got an ``unpark`` just before on an unparked thread, it does not park.`
…mulacrum Add my new email address to .mailmap
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
|
📌 Commit fa7e9ea has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
⌛ Testing commit fa7e9ea with merge 23097c8144b9539a6b8db6b2d9a675acd7dc3104... |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors retry |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
🔒 Merge conflict This pull request and the master branch diverged in a way that cannot be automatically merged. Please rebase on top of the latest master branch, and let the reviewer approve again. How do I rebase?Assuming
You may also read Git Rebasing to Resolve Conflicts by Drew Blessing for a short tutorial. Please avoid the "Resolve conflicts" button on GitHub. It uses Sometimes step 4 will complete without asking for resolution. This is usually due to difference between how Error message |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #83663) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
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:
#[doc(spotlight)]to#[doc(notable_trait)]#80965 (Rename#[doc(spotlight)]to#[doc(notable_trait)])Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup