Skip to content
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

Rollup of 8 pull requests #90165

Closed
wants to merge 24 commits into from

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

JohnTitor and others added 24 commits October 16, 2021 02:49
It's a visitor property rather than something that needs to be determined at runtime
The const qualification was so far performed before the promotion and
the implementation assumed that it will never encounter a promoted.

With `const_precise_live_drops` feature, checking for live drops is
delayed until after drop elaboration, which in turn runs after
promotion. so the assumption is no longer true. When evaluating
`NeedsNonConstDrop` it is now possible to encounter promoteds.

Use type base qualification for the promoted. It is a sound
approximation in general, and in the specific case of promoteds and
`NeedsNonConstDrop` it is precise.
rustbot doesn't allow unauthenticated users to set `I-nominated`; apply
the same permissions to the new `I-*nominated` labels.
Previously, it wasn't clear whether "This could include" was referring
to logic errors, or undefined behaviour. Tweak wording to clarify this
sentence does not relate to UB.
…rk-Simulacrum

Clarify undefined behaviour in binary heap, btree and hashset docs

Previously, it wasn't clear whether "This could include" was referring to logic errors, or undefined behaviour. Tweak wording to clarify this sentence does not relate to UB.
Update E0637 description to mention `&` w/o an explicit lifetime name

Deal with rust-lang#89824 (comment). Another solution would be splitting the error code into two as (I think) it's a bit unclear to users why they have the same error code.
rustc_ast: Turn `MutVisitor::token_visiting_enabled` into a constant

It's a visitor property rather than something that needs to be determined at runtime
…i-obk

Fix const qualification when executed after promotion

The const qualification was so far performed before the promotion and
the implementation assumed that it will never encounter a promoted.

With `const_precise_live_drops` feature, checking for live drops is
delayed until after drop elaboration, which in turn runs after
promotion. so the assumption is no longer true. When evaluating
`NeedsNonConstDrop` it is now possible to encounter promoteds.

Use type base qualification for the promoted. It is a sound
approximation in general, and in the specific case of promoteds and
`NeedsNonConstDrop` it is precise.

Fixes rust-lang#89938.
…crum

Add a regression test for issue-83479

Add a regression test for rust-lang#83479 (comment), but not close the issue, see rust-lang#83479 (comment).
Add some tests for const_generics_defaults

I think this covers some of the stuff required for stabilisation report, some of these tests are probably covering stuff we already have but it can't hurt to have more :)

r? `````@lcnr`````
Add test for issue rust-lang#78561

Adds test for and closes rust-lang#78561 which previously crashed compiler.
…=Mark-Simulacrum

triagebot: Treat `I-*nominated` like `I-nominated`

rustbot doesn't allow unauthenticated users to set `I-nominated`; apply the same permissions to the new `I-*nominated` labels.
@rustbot rustbot added the rollup A PR which is a rollup label Oct 22, 2021
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ p=8 rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 22, 2021

📌 Commit d3b9a1a has been approved by matthiaskrgr

@bors bors added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Oct 22, 2021
@klensy
Copy link
Contributor

klensy commented Oct 22, 2021

this rollup intersects with #90161

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 22, 2021

⌛ Testing commit d3b9a1a with merge 67a1eef3f6a3cb826fda7f5f813deef165e089d7...

@JohnTitor
Copy link
Member

Oh sorry, I forgot to r+ my rollup 😅 @bors retry yielding

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

@camsteffen
Copy link
Contributor

#90161 is running now @bors r-

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Oct 22, 2021
@JohnTitor
Copy link
Member

Yeah, let's close not to have duplicate work.

@JohnTitor JohnTitor closed this Oct 22, 2021
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

I would have kept this open for maybe 2 hours, in case 90161 fails bors would start with that one right after.

@camsteffen
Copy link
Contributor

If both are merged, it would be confusing to tell which PRs are merged with which rollup.

@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

Sure but we have more than 3 hours to kill the second rollup in time ^^

@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-mffxvn5 branch November 20, 2021 15:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.