Downgrade unit struct match via S(..) warnings to errors #30753
Conversation
|
r? @jroesch (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
|
(This is high priority regression fix) |
| @@ -659,6 +659,12 @@ pub fn check_pat_enum<'a, 'tcx>(pcx: &pat_ctxt<'a, 'tcx>, | |||
| let report_bad_struct_kind = |is_warning| { | |||
| bad_struct_kind_err(tcx.sess, pat.span, path, is_warning); | |||
| if is_warning { | |||
| // Boo! Too painful to attach this to the actual warning, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, I think we should modify bad_struct_kind_err to look at is_warning and add a lint in the case of is_warning == true. This will also require adding a new lint corresponding to this future incompatibility. That said, I was going to do a quick PR to improve that tooling so as to address #30746, so maybe I could just roll that change into that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I debated about doing this but decided I was better off keeping this PR minimal to ease backporting to beta... what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(I think I should have pushed back harder here. But then again I didn't expect bors to take four days to get to this)
(this makes them handled like enum unit-variants.)
pnkfelix
force-pushed
the
downgrade-29383-struct-warnings-to-errors
branch
from
66bafbe
to
40e2ac2
Compare
|
@nikomatsakis Okay I think this is what you want w.r.t. the lint structure. How does this look to you? |
|
Looks great! @bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 40e2ac2 has been approved by |
hmm, why did that arise on the travis build |
|
@bors r- i need to look at the two failure cases |
…nd then exit. I think that behavior is fine, so I am removing the expected warnings from these tests.
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit fa027d1 has been approved by |
|
@bors r- |
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit fa027d1 has been approved by |
brson
added
the
beta-nominated
|
⌛ Testing commit fa027d1 with merge 41f7bf7... |
|
💔 Test failed - auto-win-msvc-32-opt |
|
@bors: retry On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:53 PM, bors notifications@github.com wrote:
|
|
@bors p=1 (upping priority for regression fixing or beta-nominated PR's) |
pnkfelix
added
the
T-compiler
|
@nikomatsakis I added #30724 to the beta-nominated set because it seemed like a natural candidate for a back port to beta (and also because 40e2ac2 in this PR depends on infrastructure added by that PR) however, given that the beta is going to be cut very soon, perhaps back porting PR #30724 would be unwise, and thus I should make a separate PR against beta branch that only goes up to 8aed830 (inclusive) Thoughts? Cc @brson @rust-lang/compiler |
|
@pnkfelix and I discussed on IRC -- seems like best thing is to backport this PR and just the (very few) bits of infrastructure needed to make it work. |
brson
added
beta-accepted
Downgrade unit struct match via S(..) warnings to errors
The error signalling was introduced in #29383
It was noted as a warning-cycle-less regression in #30379
Fix #30379