More option optimization tests #140950
Merged
More option optimization tests #140950
+52
−10
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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 has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum. Use |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
jieyouxu
reviewed
May 12, 2025
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
clubby789
force-pushed
the
nonzero-ord-test
branch
from
b1194d9 to
5eb47ee
Compare
|
@bors r+ Not sure how easy it is to make these tests continue failing despite them ideally succeeding, but I think that's mostly harmless. |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
jhpratt
added a commit
to jhpratt/rust
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2025
…-Simulacrum More option optimization tests I noticed that although adding a manual implementation for PartialOrd on Option in rust-lang#122024, I didn't add a test so that we can easily check if this behavior has improved. This also adds a couple of `should-fail` tests - this will allow us to remove these hacky implementations if upstream LLVM improves.
This was referenced May 24, 2025
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 25, 2025
Rollup of 4 pull requests Successful merges: - #139831 (rustdoc: on mobile, make the sidebar full width and linewrap) - #140950 (More option optimization tests) - #141108 (Docs(lib): Fix `extract_if` docs) - #141361 (use `cfg_select!` to select the right `VaListImpl` definition) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 25, 2025
Rollup merge of #140950 - clubby789:nonzero-ord-test, r=Mark-Simulacrum More option optimization tests I noticed that although adding a manual implementation for PartialOrd on Option in #122024, I didn't add a test so that we can easily check if this behavior has improved. This also adds a couple of `should-fail` tests - this will allow us to remove these hacky implementations if upstream LLVM improves.
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.
I noticed that although adding a manual implementation for PartialOrd on Option in #122024, I didn't add a test so that we can easily check if this behavior has improved.
This also adds a couple of
should-failtests - this will allow us to remove these hacky implementations if upstream LLVM improves.