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

Use source callsite in check_argument_types suggestion #96589

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 3, 2022

Conversation

Badel2
Copy link
Contributor

@Badel2 Badel2 commented Apr 30, 2022

This makes the "remove extra arguement" suggestion valid when the function argument is a macro.

Additionally, this may fix #96225, but the only way I can reproduce that issue is using the playground, so we will need to wait until after this is merged to ensure it's fixed.

This makes the "remove extra arguement" suggestion valid when the
function argument is a macro
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @michaelwoerister

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Apr 30, 2022
@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Apr 30, 2022
@michaelwoerister
Copy link
Member

Thanks, @Badel2! Looks good to me.
@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 2, 2022

📌 Commit 685f66b has been approved by michaelwoerister

@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 May 2, 2022
GuillaumeGomez added a commit to GuillaumeGomez/rust that referenced this pull request May 2, 2022
…erister

Use source callsite in check_argument_types suggestion

This makes the "remove extra arguement" suggestion valid when the function argument is a macro.

Additionally, this may fix rust-lang#96225, but the only way I can reproduce that issue is using the playground, so we will need to wait until after this is merged to ensure it's fixed.
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 3, 2022
Rollup of 8 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#93097 (Switch settings menu to full js)
 - rust-lang#96587 (Refactor the WriteBackendMethods and ExtraBackendMethods traits)
 - rust-lang#96589 (Use source callsite in check_argument_types suggestion)
 - rust-lang#96599 (Update `RValue::Discriminant` documentation)
 - rust-lang#96614 (Add a regression test for rust-lang#92305)
 - rust-lang#96629 (Fix invalid keyword order for function declarations)
 - rust-lang#96641 (Use a yes/no enum instead of a bool.)
 - rust-lang#96646 (Mitigate impact of subtle invalid call suggestion logic)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit a587036 into rust-lang:master May 3, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.62.0 milestone May 3, 2022
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.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

thread 'rustc' panicked at 'called Result::unwrap() on an Err value: SourceNotAvailable
5 participants