-
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
BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit, compile-test its absence #81610
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
(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
label
Jan 31, 2021
ssomers
changed the title
BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit and double checked
BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit, double-check its absense
Jan 31, 2021
ssomers
changed the title
BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit, double-check its absense
BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit, compile-test its absense
Jan 31, 2021
ssomers
changed the title
BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit, compile-test its absense
BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit, compile-test its absence
Feb 1, 2021
ssomers
force-pushed
the
btree_emphasize_ord_bound
branch
from
February 1, 2021 17:46
8d00be9
to
1ade705
Compare
I realized there is no reason to touch entry.rs because all its members are equal (have the |
ssomers
force-pushed
the
btree_emphasize_ord_bound
branch
from
February 2, 2021 12:04
1ade705
to
1020784
Compare
dtolnay
approved these changes
Feb 5, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
@bors r+ rollup |
📌 Commit 1020784 has been approved by |
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
Feb 5, 2021
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 6, 2021
Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#80011 (Stabilize `peekable_next_if`) - rust-lang#81580 (Document how `MaybeUninit<Struct>` can be initialized.) - rust-lang#81610 (BTreeMap: make Ord bound explicit, compile-test its absence) - rust-lang#81664 (Avoid a hir access inside get_static) - rust-lang#81675 (Make rustdoc respect `--error-format short` in doctests) - rust-lang#81753 (Never MIR inline functions with a different instruction set) - rust-lang#81795 (Small refactor with Iterator::reduce) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
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.
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.
Most
BTreeMap
andBTreeSet
members are subject to anOrd
bound but a fair number of methods are not. To better convey and perhaps later tune theOrd
bound, make it stand out in individualwhere
clauses, instead of once far away at the beginning of animpl
block. This PR does not introduce or remove any bounds.Also adds compilation test cases checking that the bound doesn't creep in unintended on the historically unbounded methods.