-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
compiletest: Remove the one thing that was checking a directive's original_line
#131585
Conversation
r? @wesleywiser rustbot has assigned @wesleywiser. Use |
Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest cc @jieyouxu |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
r? jieyouxu |
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.
Oh yeah good catch. Thanks!
You can r=me after PR CI is green. |
🟩 @bors r=jieyouxu rollup |
compiletest: Remove the one thing that was checking a directive's `original_line` This special handling of `ignore-tidy*` was introduced during the migration to `//`@`` directives (rust-lang#120881), and has become unnecessary after the subsequent removal of the legacy directive check (rust-lang#131392).
…iaskrgr Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#130870 (Add suggestion for removing invalid path sep `::` in fn def) - rust-lang#131233 (std: fix stdout-before-main) - rust-lang#131239 (Don't assume traits used as type are trait objs in 2021 edition) - rust-lang#131277 (Handle `clippy` cases of `rustc::potential_query_instability` lint) - rust-lang#131567 (Emit an error for unstable attributes that reference already stable features) - rust-lang#131585 (compiletest: Remove the one thing that was checking a directive's `original_line`) - rust-lang#131590 (yeet some clones) - rust-lang#131597 (Take a display name for `tool_check_step!`) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Looks like this failed the rollup #131601 (comment) @bors r- |
Ah of course, |
That does seem like the sort of thing that could be checked somewhere in PR CI |
|
3d15d2d
to
b41a51f
Compare
b41a51f
to
f510880
Compare
Rebased and fixed trivial doc issue (diff). I'm running a side job to double-check that there are no more problems, after which I'll reapply the r+. |
@bors r=jieyouxu |
…iaskrgr Rollup of 6 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#131086 (Update unicode-width to 0.2.0) - rust-lang#131585 (compiletest: Remove the one thing that was checking a directive's `original_line`) - rust-lang#131614 (Error on trying to use revisions in `run-make` tests) - rust-lang#131638 (compiletest: Move debugger setup code out of `lib.rs`) - rust-lang#131641 (switch unicode-data bitsets back to 'static') - rust-lang#131642 (Special case error message for a `build-fail` test that failed check build) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Rollup merge of rust-lang#131585 - Zalathar:original-line, r=jieyouxu compiletest: Remove the one thing that was checking a directive's `original_line` This special handling of `ignore-tidy*` was introduced during the migration to `//`@`` directives (rust-lang#120881), and has become unnecessary after the subsequent removal of the legacy directive check (rust-lang#131392).
This special handling of
ignore-tidy*
was introduced during the migration to//@
directives (#120881), and has become unnecessary after the subsequent removal of the legacy directive check (#131392).