Skip to content

Some cleanups in our normalization logic #109171

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 16, 2023

Conversation

oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

@oli-obk oli-obk commented Mar 15, 2023

Changed a match to be exhaustive and deduplicated some code.

r? @compiler-errors

this pulls out the uncontroversial part of #108860

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Mar 15, 2023

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @compiler-errors (or someone else) soon.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information. Namely, in order to ensure the minimum review times lag, PR authors and assigned reviewers should ensure that the review label (S-waiting-on-review and S-waiting-on-author) stays updated, invoking these commands when appropriate:

  • @rustbot author: the review is finished, PR author should check the comments and take action accordingly
  • @rustbot review: the author is ready for a review, this PR will be queued again in the reviewer's queue

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Mar 15, 2023
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Mar 15, 2023

📌 Commit d87fbb9 has been approved by compiler-errors

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 15, 2023
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 15, 2023
…ompiler-errors

Some cleanups in our normalization logic

Changed a match to be exhaustive and deduplicated some code.

r? `@compiler-errors`

this pulls out the uncontroversial part of rust-lang#108860
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 16, 2023
…ompiler-errors

Some cleanups in our normalization logic

Changed a match to be exhaustive and deduplicated some code.

r? ``@compiler-errors``

this pulls out the uncontroversial part of rust-lang#108860
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 16, 2023
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 10 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#108875 (rustdoc: fix type search for `Option` combinators)
 - rust-lang#108971 (error-msg: impl better suggestion for `E0532`)
 - rust-lang#109139 (rustdoc: DocFS: Replace rayon with threadpool and enable it for all targets)
 - rust-lang#109151 (Assert def-kind is correct for alias types)
 - rust-lang#109158 (error-msg: expand suggestion for `unused_def` lint)
 - rust-lang#109166 (make `define_opaque_types` fully explicit)
 - rust-lang#109171 (Some cleanups in our normalization logic)
 - rust-lang#109180 (Unequal → Not equal)
 - rust-lang#109185 (rustdoc: remove `std::` from primitive intra-doc link tooltips)
 - rust-lang#109192 (Mention UEFI target promotion in release notes for 1.67.0)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 113e815 into rust-lang:master Mar 16, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.70.0 milestone Mar 16, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants