-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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 ErrorGuaranteed
to Recovered::Yes
and use it more.
#124919
Merged
bors
merged 1 commit into
rust-lang:master
from
nnethercote:Recovered-Yes-ErrorGuaranteed
May 9, 2024
Merged
Add ErrorGuaranteed
to Recovered::Yes
and use it more.
#124919
bors
merged 1 commit into
rust-lang:master
from
nnethercote:Recovered-Yes-ErrorGuaranteed
May 9, 2024
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
The starting point for this was identical comments on two different fields, in `ast::VariantData::Struct` and `hir::VariantData::Struct`: ``` // FIXME: investigate making this a `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>` recovered: bool ``` I tried that, and then found that I needed to add an `ErrorGuaranteed` to `Recovered::Yes`. Then I ended up using `Recovered` instead of `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>` for these two places and elsewhere, which required moving `ErrorGuaranteed` from `rustc_parse` to `rustc_ast`. This makes things more consistent, because `Recovered` is used in more places, and there are fewer uses of `bool` and `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>`. And safer, because it's difficult/impossible to set `recovered` to `Recovered::Yes` without having emitted an error.
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
labels
May 9, 2024
compiler-errors
approved these changes
May 9, 2024
r? compiler-errors @bors r+ rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
and removed
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
labels
May 9, 2024
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 9, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#124893 (Make a minimal amount of region APIs public) - rust-lang#124919 (Add `ErrorGuaranteed` to `Recovered::Yes` and use it more.) - rust-lang#124923 (interpret/miri: better errors on failing offset_from) - rust-lang#124924 (chore: remove repetitive words) - rust-lang#124926 (Make `#![feature]` suggestion MaybeIncorrect) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 9, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#124919 - nnethercote:Recovered-Yes-ErrorGuaranteed, r=compiler-errors Add `ErrorGuaranteed` to `Recovered::Yes` and use it more. The starting point for this was identical comments on two different fields, in `ast::VariantData::Struct` and `hir::VariantData::Struct`: ``` // FIXME: investigate making this a `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>` recovered: bool ``` I tried that, and then found that I needed to add an `ErrorGuaranteed` to `Recovered::Yes`. Then I ended up using `Recovered` instead of `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>` for these two places and elsewhere, which required moving `ErrorGuaranteed` from `rustc_parse` to `rustc_ast`. This makes things more consistent, because `Recovered` is used in more places, and there are fewer uses of `bool` and `Option<ErrorGuaranteed>`. And safer, because it's difficult/impossible to set `recovered` to `Recovered::Yes` without having emitted an error. r? `@oli-obk`
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors
Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
T-compiler
Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
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.
The starting point for this was identical comments on two different fields, in
ast::VariantData::Struct
andhir::VariantData::Struct
:I tried that, and then found that I needed to add an
ErrorGuaranteed
toRecovered::Yes
. Then I ended up usingRecovered
instead ofOption<ErrorGuaranteed>
for these two places and elsewhere, which required movingErrorGuaranteed
fromrustc_parse
torustc_ast
.This makes things more consistent, because
Recovered
is used in more places, and there are fewer uses ofbool
andOption<ErrorGuaranteed>
. And safer, because it's difficult/impossible to setrecovered
toRecovered::Yes
without having emitted an error.r? @oli-obk