Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Remove #[repr(transparent)] from atomics - #53979
Merged
bors merged 1 commit intoSep 7, 2018
Merged
Conversation
Added in rust-lang#52149 the discussion in rust-lang#53514 is showing how we may not want to actually add this attribute to the atomic types. While we continue to debate rust-lang#53514 this commit reverts the addition of the `transparent` attribute. This should be a more conservative route which leaves us the ability to tweak this in the future but in the meantime allows us to continue discussion as well.
rust-highfive
commented
Sep 5, 2018
Contributor
r? @aturon (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
alexcrichton
commented
Sep 5, 2018
MemberAuthor
r? @sfackler |
sfackler
commented
Sep 6, 2018
Member
@bors r+ |
bors
commented
Sep 6, 2018
Collaborator
📌 Commit 0338d34 has been approved by |
sfackler
commented
Sep 6, 2018
Member
This needs to be beta backported right? |
fbstj
commented
Sep 6, 2018
Contributor
kennytm added a commit
to kennytm/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2018
…t-atomics-master, r=sfackler Remove `#[repr(transparent)]` from atomics Added in rust-lang#52149 the discussion in rust-lang#53514 is showing how we may not want to actually add this attribute to the atomic types. While we continue to debate rust-lang#53514 this commit reverts the addition of the `transparent` attribute. This should be a more conservative route which leaves us the ability to tweak this in the future but in the meantime allows us to continue discussion as well.
bors added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2018
Rollup of 17 pull requests Successful merges: - #53299 (Updated core/macros.rs to note it works in a no_std environment.) - #53376 (Cross reference io::copy and fs::copy in docs.) - #53455 (Individual docs for {from,to}_*_bytes) - #53550 (librustc_lint: In recursion warning, change 'recurring' to 'recursing') - #53860 (Migrate (some) of run-pass/ to ui) - #53874 (Implement Unpin for Box, Rc, and Arc) - #53895 (tidy: Cleanups and clippy warning fixes) - #53946 (Clarify `ManuallyDrop` docs) - #53948 (Minimized clippy test from when NLL disabled two-phase borrows) - #53959 (Add .git extension to submodule paths missing it) - #53966 (A few cleanups and minor improvements to mir/dataflow) - #53967 (propagate build.python into cmake) - #53979 (Remove `#[repr(transparent)]` from atomics) - #53991 (Add unchecked_shl/shr check for intrinsics to fix miri's test suit) - #53992 (migrate run-pass/borrowck to ui/run-pass) - #53994 (migrate run-pass/*/ to ui/run-pass) - #54023 (update clippy submodule)
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
8 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.
Added in #52149 the discussion in #53514 is showing how we may not want to
actually add this attribute to the atomic types. While we continue to
debate #53514 this commit reverts the addition of the
transparentattribute.This should be a more conservative route which leaves us the ability to tweak
this in the future but in the meantime allows us to continue discussion as well.