-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.1k
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
Bogus duplicate definition of value error #3186
Labels
A-resolve
Area: Name/path resolution done by `rustc_resolve` specifically
Comments
Fixed. |
Thanks! On 13 August 2012 23:19, Brian Anderson notifications@github.com wrote:
|
bors
pushed a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this issue
May 15, 2021
Update `rustc-ap-*` crates to 290.0.0.
celinval
pushed a commit
to celinval/rust-dev
that referenced
this issue
Jun 4, 2024
…about an unknown `cfg`. (rust-lang#3187) Starting with the 2024-05-05 toolchain (and the upcoming Rust 1.80 release), the `unexpected_cfgs` lint has been turned on by default. As a result, running `cargo kani` on a crate that has a `#[cfg(kani)]` results in a warning (see rust-lang#3186). To avoid this warning, this PR adds `--check-cfg=cfg(kani)` to `RUSTFLAGS` when Kani invokes `cargo`. Call-outs: On such packages, doing a `cargo build` will also result in this warning, unless: ```rust println!("cargo::rustc-check-cfg=cfg(kani)"); ``` is added to the package's `build.rs` file. However, this warning would only occur with `cargo build` if the package uses the 2024-05-05 toolchain (or newer), or the Rust version used in the package is upgraded to 1.80 (when it's released at the end of July 2024). Since we're likely to release a new version of Kani sooner than the 1.80 release, this PR mitigates the issue that is more likely to impact users (a warning from `cargo kani`). Resolves rust-lang#3186 By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 and MIT licenses.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The following code compiles with no warning or error:
However if the positions of the enums are reversed then the compile fails with a (I think bogus) error message:
The error message is:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: