-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
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
Tighten spans for bad fields in struct deriving Copy
#97722
Tighten spans for bad fields in struct deriving Copy
#97722
Conversation
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 4c6a6bc has been approved by |
@Dylan-DPC Reading this comment, I guess @compiler-errors wanted to confirm it to @estebank. |
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#96642 (Avoid zero-sized allocs in ThinBox if T and H are both ZSTs.) - rust-lang#97647 (Lazily allocate and initialize pthread locks.) - rust-lang#97715 (Support the `#[expect]` attribute on fn parameters (RFC-2383)) - rust-lang#97716 (Fix reachability analysis for const methods) - rust-lang#97722 (Tighten spans for bad fields in struct deriving `Copy`) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Yes, @JohnTitor is correct. @Dylan-DPC, please be careful about r+'ing PRs that might need or want review from specific people, regardless of the size of the PR. |
sure looked trivial enough :P and any changes can be made over it later without much disruption :) |
It does mean we have to make another PR and the master branch would have a possible wrong change until another change lands, though. Any urgent PRs will be handled by the relevant team in general so you don't have to rush r+'ing PRs, I think. |
r? @estebank
Closes #89137 for good, I think
Not sure if this is what you were looking for in #89137 (comment)