-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.2k
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
Add long explanation for E0212 #79639
Add long explanation for E0212 #79639
Conversation
Some changes occurred in diagnostic error codes |
r? @estebank (rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
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.
Squashing is good, but you can wait to squash until all the comments have been addressed if you like.
field: I::A) {} // error! | ||
|
||
|
||
struct SomeStruct<I: for<'x> Foo<&'x isize>> { |
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.
Maybe only have one example? These all look basically the same and I think it's more important to be concise than exhaustive here. I don't feel strongly about that though.
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.
I took these example from corresponding test cases. I agree with you that the important point is conciseness rather than exhaustiveness. Also, I want to know what other reviewers think about this.
532c10f
to
be34f7f
Compare
Update compiler/rustc_error_codes/src/error_codes/E0212.md Co-authored-by: Joshua Nelson <[email protected]>
be34f7f
to
87c6216
Compare
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.
LGTM, but I'd like @estebank to double-check the new error message I suggested makes sense.
Looks good to me. Do you want to squash or not here? In any case, r=me once ready. |
✌️ @@sasurau4 can now approve this pull request |
@bors r=GuillaumeGomez rollup |
@sasurau4: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers |
@sasurau4: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: not in try users |
@bors r+ rollup |
@sasurau4: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers |
@sasurau4: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: not in try users |
😕 @bors r=GuillaumeGomez rollup |
📌 Commit 87c6216 has been approved by |
…on-E0212, r=GuillaumeGomez Add long explanation for E0212 Helps with rust-lang#61137
Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#77027 (Improve documentation for `std::{f32,f64}::mul_add`) - rust-lang#79375 (Make the kernel_copy tests more robust/concurrent.) - rust-lang#79639 (Add long explanation for E0212) - rust-lang#79698 (Add tracking issue template for library features.) - rust-lang#79809 (Dogfood `str_split_once()`) - rust-lang#79851 (Clarify the 'default is only allowed on...' error) - rust-lang#79858 (Update const-fn doc in unstable-book) - rust-lang#79860 (Clarify that String::split_at takes a byte index.) - rust-lang#79871 (Fix small typo in `wrapping_shl` documentation) - rust-lang#79896 (Make search results tab and help button focusable with keyboard) - rust-lang#79917 (Use Symbol for inline asm register class names) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Helps with #61137