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

A handful of cleanups for rustc/mir #54788

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 4, 2018
Merged

Conversation

ljedrz
Copy link
Contributor

@ljedrz ljedrz commented Oct 3, 2018

  • use the "regular" into() instead of graphviz::IntoCow in mod.rs
  • format!("{}", x) > x.to_string()
  • remove one unnecessary String allocation
  • shorten the logic of one loop
  • assert!(x == y) > assert_eq!(x, y)
  • whitespace & formatting fixes

r? @oli-obk

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Oct 3, 2018
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Oct 3, 2018

@bors r+ rollup

thanks!

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 3, 2018

📌 Commit f0de294 has been approved by oli-obk

@bors 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 Oct 3, 2018
kennytm added a commit to kennytm/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2018
A handful of cleanups for rustc/mir

- use the "regular" `into()` instead of `graphviz::IntoCow` in `mod.rs`
- `format!("{}", x)` > `x.to_string()`
- remove one unnecessary `String` allocation
- shorten the logic of one loop
- `assert!(x == y)` > `assert_eq!(x, y)`
- whitespace & formatting fixes

r? @oli-obk
pietroalbini added a commit to pietroalbini/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2018
A handful of cleanups for rustc/mir

- use the "regular" `into()` instead of `graphviz::IntoCow` in `mod.rs`
- `format!("{}", x)` > `x.to_string()`
- remove one unnecessary `String` allocation
- shorten the logic of one loop
- `assert!(x == y)` > `assert_eq!(x, y)`
- whitespace & formatting fixes

r? @oli-obk
pietroalbini added a commit to pietroalbini/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2018
A handful of cleanups for rustc/mir

- use the "regular" `into()` instead of `graphviz::IntoCow` in `mod.rs`
- `format!("{}", x)` > `x.to_string()`
- remove one unnecessary `String` allocation
- shorten the logic of one loop
- `assert!(x == y)` > `assert_eq!(x, y)`
- whitespace & formatting fixes

r? @oli-obk
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2018
Rollup of 10 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - #53523 (Add doc for impl From for Std Error)
 - #54746 (simplify some unused lints code)
 - #54761 (Make spec_extend use for_each())
 - #54769 (Fix typo in CONTRIBUTING.md)
 - #54773 (Update a FIXME in memory.rs)
 - #54777 (abolish ICE when pretty-printing async block)
 - #54780 (Remove duplicate predicates in `explicit_predicates_of`)
 - #54788 (A handful of cleanups for rustc/mir)
 - #54789 (Introduce `TyKind::UnnormalizedProjection`)
 - #54795 (remove padding from multiline format string label)

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 4, 2018

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #54809) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Oct 4, 2018
@bors bors merged commit f0de294 into rust-lang:master Oct 4, 2018
@ljedrz ljedrz deleted the cleanup_rustc_mir branch October 4, 2018 14:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants