-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
refactor(toml): Further clean up inheritance #13000
Merged
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
r? @weihanglo (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
A-manifest
Area: Cargo.toml issues
S-waiting-on-review
Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
labels
Nov 19, 2023
weihanglo
approved these changes
Nov 20, 2023
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.
Both make sense. Thank you
@bors r+ |
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
Nov 20, 2023
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 20, 2023
Update cargo 9 commits in 9765a449d9b7341c2b49b88da41c2268ea599720..71cd3a926f0cf41eeaf9f2a7f2194b2aff85b0f6 2023-11-17 20:58:23 +0000 to 2023-11-20 15:30:57 +0000 - Handle $message_type in JSON diagnostics (rust-lang/cargo#13016) - refactor(toml): Further clean up inheritance (rust-lang/cargo#13000) - Fix `--check-cfg` invocations with zero features (rust-lang/cargo#13011) - chore: bump `cargo-credential-*` crates as e58b84d broke stuff (rust-lang/cargo#13010) - contrib docs: Update now that credential crates are published. (rust-lang/cargo#13006) - Add more resources to the contrib docs. (rust-lang/cargo#13008) - Respect `rust-lang/rust`'s `omit-git-hash` (rust-lang/cargo#12968) - Fix clippy-wrapper test race condition. (rust-lang/cargo#12999) - fix(resolver): Don't do git fetches when updating workspace members (rust-lang/cargo#12975)
20 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
A-manifest
Area: Cargo.toml issues
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.
What does this PR try to resolve?
This is a follow up to #12971 that was found as I continued working towards #12801.
The first is a more general purpose API cleanup. I was bothered by the idea that a caller could create a
field.workspace = false
when that is disallowed, so I modified the API to prevent that.The second is part of needing to find a home for everything in
toml/mod.rs
. I figuredIneheritableField::as_value
is reasonable in the API, so I carried that forward. It would be reasonable to add other methods, from an API perspective, but I left that for future exploration.How should we test and review this PR?
Additional information