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

Fix FP on question_mark if returned object is not local #8080

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 7, 2021

Conversation

dswij
Copy link
Member

@dswij dswij commented Dec 6, 2021

Closes #8019

changelog: [question_mark] Fix FP when returned object is not local

@rust-highfive
Copy link

r? @giraffate

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

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties label Dec 6, 2021
@giraffate
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+

Thanks!

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 7, 2021

📌 Commit 01ca66c has been approved by giraffate

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 7, 2021

⌛ Testing commit 01ca66c with merge f615ea4...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 7, 2021

☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test
Approved by: giraffate
Pushing f615ea4 to master...

@bors bors merged commit f615ea4 into rust-lang:master Dec 7, 2021
@dswij dswij deleted the 8019 branch December 7, 2021 01:28
bors bot added a commit to crossbeam-rs/crossbeam that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2022
892: Remove unnecessary allowed lints r=taiki-e a=taiki-e

clippy::mutex_atomic has been moved to the allowed by default group in Rust 1.60 (rust-lang/rust-clippy#8260).
clippy::question_mark bug has been fixed in Rust 1.59 (rust-lang/rust-clippy#8080).

Co-authored-by: Taiki Endo <te316e89@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

question_mark suggests using ? in a method which doesn't return result
4 participants