Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
un-regress behavior of unused_results lint for booleans - #44122
Closed
zackmdavis wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
un-regress behavior of unused_results lint for booleans#44122zackmdavis wants to merge 1 commit into
unused_results lint for booleans#44122zackmdavis wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
This, as rust-lang#43813, is due to the author of rust-lang#43728 (specifically, 3645b06) being a damnably contemptible fool. Before this entire fiasco, we would return early from the unusedness late lints pass if the type of the expression within the `hir::StmtSemi` was `!`, `()`, or a boolean: these types would never get to the point of being marked as unused results. That is, until the dunce who somehow (!?) came to be trusted with the plum responsibility of implementing RFC 1940 (`#[must_use]` for functions) went and fouled everything up, removing the early returns based on the (stupid) thought that there would be no harm in it, since we would need to continue to check these types being returned from must_use functions (which was true for the booleans, at least). But there was harm—harm that any quarter-way-competent programmer would have surely forseen! For after the new functional-must-use checks, there was nothing to stop the previously-returned-early types from falling through to be marked by the unused-results lint!—a monumentally idiotic error that has cost the project tens of precious developer- and reviewer-minutes dealing with the fallout here and in rust-lang#43813. If 3645b06 is representative of the standard of craftsmanship the rising generation of software engineers holds themselves to, I weep for the future of our technological civilization. Resolvesrust-lang#44119.
rust-highfive
commented
Aug 28, 2017
Contributor
r? @eddyb (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
eddyb
commented
Aug 28, 2017
Contributor
@bors r+ rollup |
bors
commented
Aug 28, 2017
Collaborator
📌 Commit cc5ea04 has been approved by |
arielb1
commented
Aug 28, 2017
Contributor
1.21 is now beta, so this needs to be applied there. |
frewsxcv added a commit
to frewsxcv/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2017
…_results, r=eddyb un-regress behavior of `unused_results` lint for booleans Resolvesrust-lang#44119.
frewsxcv added a commit
to frewsxcv/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2017
…_results, r=eddyb un-regress behavior of `unused_results` lint for booleans Resolvesrust-lang#44119.
frewsxcv added a commit
to frewsxcv/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2017
…_results, r=eddyb un-regress behavior of `unused_results` lint for booleans Resolvesrust-lang#44119.
frewsxcv added a commit
to frewsxcv/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2017
…_results, r=eddyb un-regress behavior of `unused_results` lint for booleans Resolvesrust-lang#44119.
arielb1 pushed a commit
to arielb1/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 29, 2017
…_results, r=eddyb un-regress behavior of `unused_results` lint for booleans Resolvesrust-lang#44119.
zackmdavis
commented
Aug 29, 2017
ContributorAuthor
@bors r- (if I can do that; it would make sense for the author to have r- privs) The discussion on #44119 is leaning towards not doing this (three team members and one other contributor against, no one in favor yet). (The rollup #44164 is already in progress; if it passes, this will have been too late and I can make a revert PR afterwards. I'm imagining that the close/r-minus-attempt here won't itself disrupt the rollup.) |
bors
commented
Aug 29, 2017
Collaborator
@zackmdavis: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers |
1 similar comment
bors
commented
Aug 29, 2017
Collaborator
@zackmdavis: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers |
zackmdavis
commented
Aug 29, 2017
ContributorAuthor
@bors we heard you the first time; you don't have to rub it in |
arielb1
commented
Aug 29, 2017
Contributor
@bors r- |
alexcrichton
commented
Sep 1, 2017
Member
Removing the beta-nominated tag as this was closed |
alexcrichton
commented
Sep 1, 2017
Member
er sorry didn't mean to reopen |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
7 participants
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.
Resolves#44119.