Rename hir::Local into hir::LetStmt
#122780
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
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
Some changes occurred in src/tools/clippy cc @rust-lang/clippy Some changes occurred in need_type_info.rs cc @lcnr |
GuillaumeGomez
force-pushed
the
rename-hir-local
branch
from
8a9f954 to
5edb85b
Compare
|
Rebased. |
oli-obk
reviewed
Mar 21, 2024
|
Renamed |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
GuillaumeGomez
force-pushed
the
rename-hir-local
branch
from
9be3e12 to
e0d3439
Compare
|
Rebased and updated the new clippy code. |
|
@bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
workingjubilee
added a commit
to workingjubilee/rustc
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2024
…=oli-obk Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt` Follow-up of rust-lang#122776. As discussed on [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Improve.20naming.20of.20.60ExprKind.3A.3ALet.60.3F). I made this change into a separate PR because I'm less sure about this change as is. For example, we have `visit_local` and `LocalSource` items. Is it fine to keep these two as is (I supposed it is but I prefer to ask) or not? Having `Node::Local(LetStmt)` makes things more explicit but is it going too far? r? `@oli-obk`
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2024
…kingjubilee Rollup of 10 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#121940 (Mention Register Size in `#[warn(asm_sub_register)]`) - rust-lang#122460 (Rework rmake support library API) - rust-lang#122698 (Cancel `cargo update` job if there's no updates) - rust-lang#122780 (Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt`) - rust-lang#122875 (CFI: Support self_cell-like recursion) - rust-lang#122879 (CFI: Strip auto traits off Virtual calls) - rust-lang#122915 (Delay a bug if no RPITITs were found) - rust-lang#122916 (docs(sync): normalize dot in fn summaries) - rust-lang#122922 (-Zprint-type-sizes: print the types of awaitees and unnamed coroutine locals.) - rust-lang#122927 (Change an ICE regression test to use the original reproducer) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2024
…=oli-obk Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt` Follow-up of rust-lang#122776. As discussed on [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Improve.20naming.20of.20.60ExprKind.3A.3ALet.60.3F). I made this change into a separate PR because I'm less sure about this change as is. For example, we have `visit_local` and `LocalSource` items. Is it fine to keep these two as is (I supposed it is but I prefer to ask) or not? Having `Node::Local(LetStmt)` makes things more explicit but is it going too far? r? ``@oli-obk``
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#122460 (Rework rmake support library API) - rust-lang#122698 (Cancel `cargo update` job if there's no updates) - rust-lang#122780 (Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt`) - rust-lang#122875 (CFI: Support self_cell-like recursion) - rust-lang#122915 (Delay a bug if no RPITITs were found) - rust-lang#122916 (docs(sync): normalize dot in fn summaries) - rust-lang#122921 (Enable more mir-opt tests in debug builds) - rust-lang#122922 (-Zprint-type-sizes: print the types of awaitees and unnamed coroutine locals.) - rust-lang#122927 (Change an ICE regression test to use the original reproducer) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#120577 (Stabilize slice_split_at_unchecked) - rust-lang#122698 (Cancel `cargo update` job if there's no updates) - rust-lang#122780 (Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt`) - rust-lang#122915 (Delay a bug if no RPITITs were found) - rust-lang#122916 (docs(sync): normalize dot in fn summaries) - rust-lang#122921 (Enable more mir-opt tests in debug builds) - rust-lang#122922 (-Zprint-type-sizes: print the types of awaitees and unnamed coroutine locals.) - rust-lang#122927 (Change an ICE regression test to use the original reproducer) - rust-lang#122930 (add panic location to 'panicked while processing panic') - rust-lang#122931 (Fix some typos in the pin.rs) - rust-lang#122933 (tag_for_variant follow-ups) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 23, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#122780 - GuillaumeGomez:rename-hir-local, r=oli-obk Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt` Follow-up of rust-lang#122776. As discussed on [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Improve.20naming.20of.20.60ExprKind.3A.3ALet.60.3F). I made this change into a separate PR because I'm less sure about this change as is. For example, we have `visit_local` and `LocalSource` items. Is it fine to keep these two as is (I supposed it is but I prefer to ask) or not? Having `Node::Local(LetStmt)` makes things more explicit but is it going too far? r? ```@oli-obk```
RenjiSann
pushed a commit
to RenjiSann/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 25, 2024
…=oli-obk Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt` Follow-up of rust-lang#122776. As discussed on [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Improve.20naming.20of.20.60ExprKind.3A.3ALet.60.3F). I made this change into a separate PR because I'm less sure about this change as is. For example, we have `visit_local` and `LocalSource` items. Is it fine to keep these two as is (I supposed it is but I prefer to ask) or not? Having `Node::Local(LetStmt)` makes things more explicit but is it going too far? r? ```@oli-obk```
RenjiSann
pushed a commit
to RenjiSann/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 25, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#120577 (Stabilize slice_split_at_unchecked) - rust-lang#122698 (Cancel `cargo update` job if there's no updates) - rust-lang#122780 (Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt`) - rust-lang#122915 (Delay a bug if no RPITITs were found) - rust-lang#122916 (docs(sync): normalize dot in fn summaries) - rust-lang#122921 (Enable more mir-opt tests in debug builds) - rust-lang#122922 (-Zprint-type-sizes: print the types of awaitees and unnamed coroutine locals.) - rust-lang#122927 (Change an ICE regression test to use the original reproducer) - rust-lang#122930 (add panic location to 'panicked while processing panic') - rust-lang#122931 (Fix some typos in the pin.rs) - rust-lang#122933 (tag_for_variant follow-ups) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
flip1995
pushed a commit
to flip1995/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2024
…=oli-obk Rename `hir::Local` into `hir::LetStmt` Follow-up of rust-lang#122776. As discussed on [zulip](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/Improve.20naming.20of.20.60ExprKind.3A.3ALet.60.3F). I made this change into a separate PR because I'm less sure about this change as is. For example, we have `visit_local` and `LocalSource` items. Is it fine to keep these two as is (I supposed it is but I prefer to ask) or not? Having `Node::Local(LetStmt)` makes things more explicit but is it going too far? r? ```@oli-obk```
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Follow-up of #122776.
As discussed on zulip.
I made this change into a separate PR because I'm less sure about this change as is. For example, we have
visit_localandLocalSourceitems. Is it fine to keep these two as is (I supposed it is but I prefer to ask) or not? HavingNode::Local(LetStmt)makes things more explicit but is it going too far?r? @oli-obk