-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14k
reland and fix RUST-147622 #148438
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
Open
joboet
wants to merge
6
commits into
rust-lang:main
Choose a base branch
from
joboet:unicode_data_fixes
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+4,706
−1,595
Open
reland and fix RUST-147622 #148438
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
fab90d2
refactor: move runtime functions to core
Kmeakin 6a8e8cc
refactor: format `unicode_data`
Kmeakin 4d892ce
refactor: remove check that `first_code_point` is non-ascii
Kmeakin 4478025
refactor: make string formatting more readable
Kmeakin 86b3a0b
refactor: make `unicode_data` tests normal tests
Kmeakin ab82fbe
fix fallout from RUST-147622
joboet File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
Why is this test function using
const {}to generate asserts?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
The accepted idiom for having a large test case that is executed during const-eval, like this, is to simply declare a
const _: () =, which should not be nested inside a function for no particular reason. Such a nesting mostly serves the purpose of obfuscating what the function actually does at runtime at best, and potentially having funny results when the code flows through any sort of MIR interpreter at worst (const eval or our friend miri), because theconst {}should not matter to the function's actual execution but can be visible in differing ways (that I honestly don't fully understand the nuances of) at various points during compilation to MIR.