code suggestions for non-shorthand field pattern, no-mangle lints #45232
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
oli-obk
requested changes
Oct 12, 2017
src/librustc_lint/builtin.rs
Outdated
| it.name); | ||
| let mut err = cx.struct_span_lint(PRIVATE_NO_MANGLE_STATICS, it.span, &msg); | ||
| let insertion_span = it.span.with_hi(BytePos(it.span.lo().0)); | ||
| err.span_suggestion(insertion_span, "try making public", "pub ".to_owned()); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: "try making it public"
src/librustc_lint/builtin.rs
Outdated
| if let Some(no_mangle_attr) = attr::find_by_name(&it.attrs, "no_mangle") { | ||
| if attr::contains_name(&it.attrs, "linkage") { | ||
| return; | ||
| } | ||
| if !cx.access_levels.is_reachable(it.id) { | ||
| let msg = format!("function {} is marked #[no_mangle], but not exported", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
drive by fix: can you remove the function names? Most diagnostics pointing to a definition don't mention the name again.
src/librustc_lint/builtin.rs
Outdated
| let msg = format!("static {} is marked #[no_mangle], but not exported", | ||
| it.name); | ||
| cx.span_lint(PRIVATE_NO_MANGLE_STATICS, it.span, &msg); | ||
| let msg = format!("static {} is marked #[no_mangle], but not exported", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
same here (wrt name repetition in diagnostics)
src/librustc_lint/builtin.rs
Outdated
| let msg = format!("static {} is marked #[no_mangle], but not exported", | ||
| it.name); | ||
| let mut err = cx.struct_span_lint(PRIVATE_NO_MANGLE_STATICS, it.span, &msg); | ||
| let insertion_span = it.span.with_hi(BytePos(it.span.lo().0)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this should be it.span.with_hi(it.span.lo())
kennytm
added
the
S-waiting-on-author
zackmdavis
force-pushed
the
moar_lint_suggestions
branch
from
ac9c719
to
7b51b58
Compare
|
(force-push addresses @oli-obk's comments) |
zackmdavis
force-pushed
the
moar_lint_suggestions
branch
from
7b51b58
to
64020f0
Compare
|
(and the ensuing compile-fail failures reported by our mutual friend Travis) |
kennytm
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #45283) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
|
R=me once the merge conflict is fixed |
kennytm
added
S-waiting-on-author
This comment made sense when it was introduced in fbef241. It does not make sense in its current context, where the referred-to guard is no longer present. This being an item under the fabulous metabug rust-lang#44366.
We also edit the lint description to clarify that this is different from the struct field init shorthand.
At reviewer's suggestion, we remove the function/static name from the main lint message. While we're correspondingly adjusting the expectations of a compile-fail test, we remove an obsolete FIXME comment, another quantum of progress towards resolving the fabulous metabug rust-lang#44366.
zackmdavis
force-pushed
the
moar_lint_suggestions
branch
from
64020f0
to
8e6ed12
Compare
|
(and @bors's treachery) |
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 8e6ed12 has been approved by |
|
⌛ Testing commit 8e6ed12 with merge a2a91d797d872a0c98d9c632965e26d2ce9e8f19... |
|
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
|
Unrelated and spurious? Segfault looks bad though |
|
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2017
code suggestions for non-shorthand field pattern, no-mangle lints continuing in the spirit of #44942  r? @estebank
kennytm
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
|
@bors retry blame Travis. |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2017
code suggestions for non-shorthand field pattern, no-mangle lints continuing in the spirit of #44942  r? @estebank
|
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
|
@bors retry
|
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 19, 2017
code suggestions for non-shorthand field pattern, no-mangle lints continuing in the spirit of #44942  r? @estebank
|
It looks to me that travis/mac will timeout again :-/ |
|
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
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.
continuing in the spirit of #44942
r? @estebank