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

Rollup of 4 pull requests #98047

Closed
wants to merge 9 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

RalfJung and others added 9 commits June 9, 2022 20:47
Introduce allow-by-default lints for checking whether diagnostics are
written in `SessionDiagnostic`/`AddSubdiagnostic` impls and whether
diagnostics are translatable. These lints can be denied for modules once
they are fully migrated to impls and translation.

Signed-off-by: David Wood <david.wood@huawei.com>
…nts, r=oli-obk

lint: add diagnostic translation migration lints

Introduce allow-by-default lints for checking whether diagnostics are written in
`SessionDiagnostic` or `AddSubdiagnostic` impls and whether diagnostics are translatable. These lints can be denied for modules once they are fully migrated to impls and translation.

These lints are intended to be temporary - once all diagnostics have been changed then we can just change the APIs we have and that will enforce these constraints thereafter.

r? ```@oli-obk```
interpret: unify offset_from check with offset check

`offset` does the check with a single `check_ptr_access` call while `offset_from` used two calls. Make them both just one one call.

I originally intended to actually factor this into a common function, but I am no longer sure if that makes a lot of sense... the two functions start with pretty different precondition (e.g. `offset` *knows* that the 2nd pointer has the same provenance).

I also reworded the UB messages a little. Saying it "cannot" do something is not how we usually phrase UB (as far as I know). Instead it's not *allowed* to do that.

r? ```@oli-obk```
…_update_is_probably_complete, r=oli-obk

Make `type_changing_struct_update` no longer an incomplete feature

After rust-lang#97705, I don't see what would make it incomplete anymore. `check_expr_struct_fields` seems to now implement the RFC to the letter.

r? ```@nikomatsakis```
cc ```@rust-lang/types```
…g, r=davidtwco

Remove unnecessary `to_string` and `String::new`

rust-lang@73fa217 changed the type of the `suggestion` argument to `impl ToString`. This patch removes unnecessary `to_string` and `String::new`.

cc: ```@davidtwco```
@rustbot rustbot added T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Jun 13, 2022
@Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 13, 2022

📌 Commit 55746fb has been approved by Dylan-DPC

@bors bors added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Jun 13, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 13, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 55746fb with merge c826aebea45b270034b9bbe1dcb0c7b21beb0422...

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

@Dylan-DPC Dylan-DPC closed this Jun 13, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
rollup A PR which is a rollup 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. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants