Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Fix #3961 : use char range methods (not byte offsets) to detect whitespace - #6764
Closed
pnkfelix wants to merge 3 commits into
Closed
Fix #3961 : use char range methods (not byte offsets) to detect whitespace#6764pnkfelix wants to merge 3 commits into
pnkfelix wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
pnkfelix
commented
May 27, 2013
ContributorAuthor
@catamorphism hmm, I had seen that some of the files in |
pnkfelix
commented
May 27, 2013
ContributorAuthor
(in other words, I do not know what |
pnkfelix
commented
May 28, 2013
ContributorAuthor
From discussion with graydon and niko, determined that pp-exact would not be the right thing for this "test case", such as it is, because the output is not expected to match the input here. There may be a way to specify a separate output file that needs to be matched. I'll look it see if I can find that and use it. |
pnkfelix
commented
May 28, 2013
ContributorAuthor
ah maybe pp-exact:output.pp is what I want. |
pnkfelix
commented
May 28, 2013
ContributorAuthor
@brson r? |
bors added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2013
…n, r=brson r? (yes, the review request is back, now that I got it building against incom... I mean master!) (Attempting to port from orphaned pull-request #6764 ) Fix for #3961. Also includes a test case to illustrate the issues. (All of the entries that say "should align" should align with each other, and the four lines near the end that say "compare _" for _ in {A,B,C,D} should line up with each other.) Before applying this change set: -- the "(should align)"'s are all over the place, and the form/line feeding spaces are not cut out as one might or might not expect. -- compare B and D do not match A and C. (To be honest, its hard to really say what the right behavior is here, and people who are expecting a particular behavior out of a pretty printer in these cases may well get burned.)
flip1995 pushed a commit
to flip1995/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 25, 2021
…p1995 lintcheck: parallelize By default we use a single thread and one target dir as before. If `-j n` is passed, use `n` target dirs and run one clippy in each of them. We need several target dirs because cargo would lock them for a single process otherwise which would prevent the parallelism. `-j 0` makes rayon use $thread_count/2 (which I assume is the number of physical cores of a machine) for the number of threads. Other change: Show output of clippy being compiled when building it for lintcheck (makes it easier to spot compiler errors etc) Show some progress indication in the "Linting... foo 1.2.3" message. Sort crates before linting (previously crates would be split randomly between target dirs, with the sorting, we try to make sure that even crates land in target dir 0 and odd ones in target dir 1 etc..) *Please write a short comment explaining your change (or "none" for internal only changes)* changelog: parallelize lintcheck with rayon
U007D pushed a commit
to U007D/rust-mos
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 21, 2026
6774: Increment recursion count in Expander only on success r=lnicola a=Veykril Fixesrust-lang#6764 Co-authored-by: Lukas Wirth <lukastw97@gmail.com>
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
2 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.
Fix for #3961. Also includes a test case to illustrate the issues. (All of the entries that say "should align" should align with each other, and the four lines near the end that say "compare _" for _ in {A,B,C,D} should line up with each other.)
Before applying this change set:
-- the "(should align)"'s are all over the place, and the form/line feeding spaces are not cut out as one might or might not expect.
-- compare B and D do not match A and C.
(To be honest, its hard to really say what the right behavior is here, and people who are expecting a particular behavior out of a pretty printer in these cases may well get burned.)