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

add println!() macro with out any arguments #36825

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 11, 2016
Merged

Conversation

sbwtw
Copy link
Contributor

@sbwtw sbwtw commented Sep 29, 2016

@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 @aturon (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 Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed.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.

@alexcrichton alexcrichton added the T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Sep 29, 2016
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the PR! This seems like a reasonable feature to me, especially given that we've got panic!(). Looks like the failures on travis though are legitimate.

@bluss
Copy link
Member

bluss commented Sep 29, 2016

@sbwtw It looks like these two tests failed due to the changes:

failures:
    [compile-fail] compile-fail/empty-comment.rs
    [compile-fail] compile-fail/issue-7970a.rs

You can find them inside src/test in the rust source tree. Both are using println!() and expecting it to fail. I suggest you in both test cases simply define a new macro that uses at least one argument, and use that macro instead of println.

@sbwtw
Copy link
Contributor Author

sbwtw commented Sep 30, 2016

@bluss @alexcrichton hi, I have modified the test code.

@sinkuu
Copy link
Contributor

sinkuu commented Sep 30, 2016

What about letting writeln!(dst) to also write \n?

@sbwtw
Copy link
Contributor Author

sbwtw commented Sep 30, 2016

@sinkuu seems good, but I think its better to modify it in another commit.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Thanks @sbwtw! This is tagged with T-libs so we'll get around to discussing this in triage next week hopefully.

@brson brson added the relnotes Marks issues that should be documented in the release notes of the next release. label Sep 30, 2016
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@rfcbot fcp merge

Seems like a neat feature to me!

@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Oct 3, 2016

FCP proposed with disposition to merge. Review requested from:

No concerns currently listed.
See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 10, 2016

📌 Commit 7d6227a has been approved by alexcrichton

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 11, 2016

⌛ Testing commit 7d6227a with merge 1e4c8b1...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2016
add println!() macro with out any arguments

lets add println!() to write "\n".
like java https://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/api/java/io/PrintStream.html#println()
@bors bors merged commit 7d6227a into rust-lang:master Oct 11, 2016
@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Oct 17, 2016

All relevant subteam members have reviewed. No concerns remain.

@rfcbot
Copy link

rfcbot commented Oct 24, 2016

It has been one week since all blocks to the FCP were resolved.

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 7, 2017
Allow `writeln!` without arguments, in symmetry with `println!`

CC #36825.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
relnotes Marks issues that should be documented in the release notes of the next release. T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants