-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
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
Diagnostic about try
could be better on edition 2018
#54774
Comments
Or write a |
Is the macro still available in 2018 as
The actual implementation of the As a stretch goal, if we encounter any keyword being used and there's an
|
Yes; it has to be and this is what
This seems good; tho technically it hasn't been removed so perhaps emit:
We should try to nudge folks towards
This seems like a great idea. |
Given that
|
That seems better / quite good :) |
Is there any documentation somewhere why |
@philippludwig it was decided here: #53686 (comment). |
Looks like the improved version happened, so I'll close this:
|
Given:
the compiler emits the standard "reserved keyword error":
However, since
try!
was once a macro people used (wherefore it stands to reason that some old documentation may folk astray), it might be prudent to catch this pattern somehow and refer the user to the documentation about?
somewhere.cc @scottmcm, @estebank
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: