use field init shorthand EVERYWHERE #43710
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
zackmdavis
force-pushed
the
field_init_shorthand_power_slam
branch
from
d9b2360
to
f0fd454
Compare
kennytm
reviewed
Aug 7, 2017
| @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ fn main() { | |||
|
|
|||
| { | |||
| struct Bar { | |||
| x: x, | |||
| x, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Revert this, it is causing an unexpected error.
[00:44:05] ---- [compile-fail] compile-fail/lint-shorthand-field.rs stdout ----
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/lint-shorthand-field.rs:43: unexpected "error": '43:14: 43:15: expected `:`, found `,`'
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/lint-shorthand-field.rs:48: unexpected "error": '48:16: 48:19: cannot find struct, variant or union type `Bar` in this scope [E0422]'
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/lint-shorthand-field.rs:48: unexpected "error": '48:25: 48:26: cannot find value `x` in this scope [E0425]'
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/lint-shorthand-field.rs:49: unexpected "error": '49:13: 49:16: cannot find struct, variant or union type `Bar` in this scope [E0422]'
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/lint-shorthand-field.rs:22: expected error not found: the `x:` in this pattern is redundant
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/lint-shorthand-field.rs:23: expected error not found: the `y:` in this pattern is redundant
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: 4 unexpected errors found, 2 expected errors not found
[00:44:05] status: exit code: 101
| @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ | |||
| // Test that we can do shifts by any integral type. | |||
|
|
|||
| struct Panolpy { | |||
| char: char, | |||
| char, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same.
[00:44:05] ---- [compile-fail] compile-fail/shift-various-bad-types.rs stdout ----
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/shift-various-bad-types.rs:14: unexpected "error": '14:9: 14:10: expected `:`, found `,`'
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/shift-various-bad-types.rs:19: expected error not found: E0277
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/shift-various-bad-types.rs:22: expected error not found: E0277
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/shift-various-bad-types.rs:25: expected error not found: E0277
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/shift-various-bad-types.rs:35: expected error not found: mismatched types
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: /checkout/src/test/compile-fail/shift-various-bad-types.rs:35: expected message not found: expected i32, found i64
[00:44:05]
[00:44:05] error: 1 unexpected errors found, 5 expected errors not found
f0fd454
to
ab2912d
Compare
Thanks! (I'm going to need it ...) (force-push should be better, omits changes to tests) |
|
Not opposed myself, but I feel like a change of this magnitude (and probably the other PR, too, but it's fine to wait now) should maybe receive at least some attention from @rust-lang/compiler and @rust-lang/libs -- if they're fine with it, I think I am too. Haven't done a careful review yet though. |
arielb1
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
I'm OK with this. |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #43559) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
zackmdavis
force-pushed
the
field_init_shorthand_power_slam
branch
from
ab2912d
to
3dce848
Compare
|
(rebased) |
|
@bors r+ rollup |
|
📌 Commit 3dce848 has been approved by |
Mark-Simulacrum
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #43740) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
🔒 Merge conflict |
arielb1
added
S-waiting-on-author
|
@bors p=10000 Please don't roll this up - it won't work |
|
🛑 Priority higher than @9001 is ignored. |
|
@bors p=1000 |
|
yeah what
…On Aug 15, 2017 23:40, "Ariel Ben-Yehuda" ***@***.***> wrote:
@bors <https://github.com/bors> p=1000
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#43710 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAOtiNbY3Fn16WW_W4vqQvBJ4HS0ShlFks5sYhAqgaJpZM4OvBac>
.
|
|
@9001: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: and not in try users |
Like rust-lang#43008 (f668999), but _much more aggressive_.
zackmdavis
force-pushed
the
field_init_shorthand_power_slam
branch
from
3dce848
to
1b6c960
Compare
|
(updated) |
|
@bors r+ p=100 |
|
📌 Commit 1b6c960 has been approved by |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 16, 2017
…Mark-Simulacrum use field init shorthand EVERYWHERE Like #43008 (f668999), but [(lacking reasons to be more timid)](#43008 (comment)) _much more aggressive_. r? @Mark-Simulacrum
|
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
This was referenced Aug 16, 2017
Merged
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.
Like #43008 (f668999), but (lacking reasons to be more timid) much more aggressive.
r? @Mark-Simulacrum