Rename files to match current recommendations. #10143
Merged
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
kud1ing
referenced
this pull request
Oct 31, 2013
There are a few reasons that this is a desirable move to take: 1. Proof of concept that a third party event loop is possible 2. Clear separation of responsibility between rt::io and the uv-backend 3. Enforce in the future that the event loop is "pluggable" and replacable Here's a quick summary of the points of this pull request which make this possible: * Two new lang items were introduced: event_loop, and event_loop_factory. The idea of a "factory" is to define a function which can be called with no arguments and will return the new event loop as a trait object. This factory is emitted to the crate map when building an executable. The factory doesn't have to exist, and when it doesn't then an empty slot is in the crate map and a basic event loop with no I/O support is provided to the runtime. * When building an executable, then the rustuv crate will be linked by default (providing a default implementation of the event loop) via a similar method to injecting a dependency on libstd. This is currently the only location where the rustuv crate is ever linked. * There is a new #[no_uv] attribute (implied by #[no_std]) which denies implicitly linking to rustuv by default Closes #5019
|
When this gets rebased, would you mind moving |
New standards have arisen in recent months, mostly for the use of rustpkg, but the main Rust codebase has not been altered to match these new specifications. This changeset rectifies most of these issues. - Renamed the crate source files `src/libX/X.rs` to `lib.rs`, for consistency with current styles; this affects extra, rustc, rustdoc, rustpkg, rustuv, std, syntax. - Renamed `X/X.rs` to `X/mod.rs,` as is now recommended style, for `std::num` and `std::terminfo`. - Shifted `src/libstd/str/ascii.rs` out of the otherwise unused `str` directory, to be consistent with its import path of `std::ascii`; libstd is flat at present so it's more appropriate thus. While this removes some `#[path = "..."]` directives, it does not remove all of them, and leaves certain other inconsistencies, such as `std::u8` et al. which are actually stored in `src/libstd/num/` (one subdirectory down). No quorum has been reached on this issue, so I felt it best to leave them all alone at present. rust-lang#9208 deals with the possibility of making libstd more hierarchical (such as changing the crate to match the current filesystem structure, which would make the module path `std::num::u8`). There is one thing remaining in which this repository is not rustpkg-compliant: rustpkg would have `src/std/` et al. rather than `src/libstd/` et al. I have not endeavoured to change that at this point as it would guarantee prompt bitrot and confusion. A change of that magnitude needs to be discussed first.
|
(Am I able to trigger a retry in that way? I don't know. Let's find out!) (Correct answer: no, plus the "retry" wasn't on the r+'d commit, plus the r+ was on a commit now orphaned in the rebase-plus-rename-rustuv.) |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2013
New standards have arisen in recent months, mostly for the use of rustpkg, but the main Rust codebase has not been altered to match these new specifications. This changeset rectifies most of these issues. - Renamed the crate source files `src/libX/X.rs` to `lib.rs`, for consistency with current styles; this affects extra, rustc, rustdoc, rustpkg, std, syntax. - Renamed `X/X.rs` to `X/mod.rs,` as is now recommended style, for `std::num` and `std::terminfo`. - Shifted `src/libstd/str/ascii.rs` out of the otherwise unused `str` directory, to be consistent with its import path of `std::ascii`; libstd is flat at present so it's more appropriate thus. While this removes some `#[path = "..."]` directives, it does not remove all of them, and leaves certain other inconsistencies, such as `std::u8` et al. which are actually stored in `src/libstd/num/` (one subdirectory down). No quorum has been reached on this issue, so I felt it best to leave them all alone at present. #9208 deals with the possibility of making libstd more hierarchical (such as changing the crate to match the current filesystem structure, which would make the module path `std::num::u8`). There is one thing remaining in which this repository is not rustpkg-compliant: rustpkg would have `src/std/` et al. rather than `src/libstd/` et al. I have not endeavoured to change that at this point as it would guarantee prompt bitrot and confusion. A change of that magnitude needs to be discussed first.
flip1995
pushed a commit
to flip1995/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 12, 2023
…t-FP, r=Manishearth don't lint field_reassign when field in closure fixes rust-lang#10136 This change makes the ContainsName struct visit all interior expressions, which means that ContainsName will return true even if `name` is used in a closure within `expr`. --- changelog: FP: [`field_reassign_with_default`]: No longer lints cases, where values are initializes from closures capturing struct values [rust-lang#10143](rust-lang/rust-clippy#10143) <!-- changelog_checked -->
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.
New standards have arisen in recent months, mostly for the use of
rustpkg, but the main Rust codebase has not been altered to match these
new specifications. This changeset rectifies most of these issues.
src/libX/X.rstolib.rs, forconsistency with current styles; this affects extra, rustc, rustdoc,
rustpkg, std, syntax.
X/X.rstoX/mod.rs,as is now recommended style, forstd::numandstd::terminfo.src/libstd/str/ascii.rsout of the otherwise unusedstrdirectory, to be consistent with its import path of
std::ascii;libstd is flat at present so it's more appropriate thus.
While this removes some
#[path = "..."]directives, it does not removeall of them, and leaves certain other inconsistencies, such as
std::u8et al. which are actually stored in
src/libstd/num/(one subdirectorydown). No quorum has been reached on this issue, so I felt it best to
leave them all alone at present. #9208 deals with the possibility of
making libstd more hierarchical (such as changing the crate to match the
current filesystem structure, which would make the module path
std::num::u8).There is one thing remaining in which this repository is not
rustpkg-compliant: rustpkg would have
src/std/et al. rather thansrc/libstd/et al. I have not endeavoured to change that at this pointas it would guarantee prompt bitrot and confusion. A change of that
magnitude needs to be discussed first.