-
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
remove error code from E0789
, add UI test/docs
#107148
Conversation
Some changes occurred in diagnostic error codes |
// paired with a `stable` attribute | ||
``` | ||
|
||
*Note that while `#[rustc_allowed_through_unstable_modules]` still exists and* |
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.
Please remote the stars. I don't think having this effect brings much on this paragraph.
*is used within the compiler, it no longer is marked as `E0789` and instead* | ||
*has no error code.* | ||
|
||
Typically when a item is marked with a `stable` attribute, the modules that |
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.
Typically when a item is marked with a `stable` attribute, the modules that | |
Typically when an item is marked with a `stable` attribute, the modules that |
Even if the change in the compiler is super small, still need someone from the compiler team to take a look. ;) |
Compiler change looks good to me |
3bf2cdb
to
dc8325d
Compare
@GuillaumeGomez I've changed my mind on this a bit, now I think that it should keep it's error code. If we remove it then it's just wasted error code real estate. I've applied your suggestions. |
|
||
The internal `rustc_allowed_through_unstable_modules` attribute must be used | ||
on an item with a `stable` attribute. | ||
|
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.
Still missing the style formatting "Erroneous code example". ;)
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.
Oops. Won't it be nice when tidy can finally lint this properly!
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.
I'm definitely looking forward to it!
dc8325d
to
00ff718
Compare
Thanks! @bors r=compiler-errors,GuillaumeGomezrollup |
Oh nice failure. @bors r=compiler-errors,GuillaumeGomez rollup |
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#106796 (BPF: Disable atomic CAS) - rust-lang#106886 (Make stage2 rustdoc and proc-macro-srv disableable in x.py install) - rust-lang#107101 (Filter param-env predicates for errors before calling `to_opt_poly_trait_pred`) - rust-lang#107109 (ThinBox: Add intra-doc-links for Metadata) - rust-lang#107148 (remove error code from `E0789`, add UI test/docs) - rust-lang#107151 (Instantiate dominators algorithm only once) - rust-lang#107153 (Consistently use dominates instead of is_dominated_by) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
E0789
shouldn't have an error code, it's explicitly internal-only and is tiny in scope. (I wonder if we can tighten the standard for this in the RFC?) I also added a UI test and error docs (done likeE0208
, they are "no longer emitted").r? @GuillaumeGomez (shouldn't need a compiler review, it's pretty minor)