Skip to content

Add reverse search alias for Iterator::rev() - #83066

Merged
bors merged 1 commit into
rust-lang:masterfrom
Seppel3210:master
Mar 14, 2021
Merged

Add reverse search alias for Iterator::rev()#83066
bors merged 1 commit into
rust-lang:masterfrom
Seppel3210:master

Conversation

@Seppel3210

@Seppel3210Seppel3210 commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

When searching for "reverse" in rustdoc you can't find the rev method on Iterator so here is a search alias for that.

@rust-highfive

rust-highfive commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

r? @joshtriplett

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfiverust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Mar 13, 2021
ibraheemdev
ibraheemdev reviewed Mar 13, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadlibrary/core/src/iter/traits/iterator.rs Outdated
Comment on lines 2739 to 2741

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

@joshtriplettjoshtriplettMar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I haven't seen anything indicating length-sorting in any of the contribution documentation, and I also haven't seen examples of that in the compiler source. From what I can tell, order is generally (in order of importance):

  • Semantically significant ordering (if one attribute affects another)
  • Grouping related attributes (e.g. multiple stability-related attributes)
  • More-or-less alphabetical.

This ordering seems consistent with that, to me.

Is there some policy I'm unaware of?

@ibraheemdevibraheemdevMar 13, 2021•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@joshtriplett I don't think there is a policy, you would know better than me if there was :) I just thought it looked better and more consistent that way.

@Seppel3210Seppel3210Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just looked one or two examples elsewhere and just did that but I can also change it to that I guess :)

ibraheemdev
ibraheemdev requested changes Mar 13, 2021
View reviewed changes

@ibraheemdevibraheemdev left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

.

@joshtriplett

joshtriplett commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

r=me, after the formatting discussion is resolved one way or the other.

@Seppel3210

Seppel3210 commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

This should be fine now? @ibraheemdev

@Seppel3210

Seppel3210 commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@bors r=joshtriplett

@bors

bors commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@Seppel3210: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers

@Seppel3210

Seppel3210 commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

😔

@Seppel3210

Seppel3210 commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@joshtriplett , @ibraheemdev could one of you approve that then 🙂

@ibraheemdev

ibraheemdev commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I don't have sufficient privileges either.

@joshtriplett

joshtriplett commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@bors r+ rollup

@bors

bors commented Mar 13, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

📌 Commit f201746 has been approved by joshtriplett

@borsbors 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 13, 2021
@JohnTitorJohnTitor mentioned this pull request Mar 14, 2021
Merged
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 14, 2021
@bors
Auto merge ofrust-lang#83105- JohnTitor:rollup-tqpm8pb, r=JohnTitor
1381dcf
Rollup of 10 pull requests
Successful merges:
- rust-lang#81465 (Add documentation about formatting `Duration` values)
- rust-lang#82121 (Implement Extend and FromIterator for OsString)
- rust-lang#82617 (Document `everybody_loops`)
- rust-lang#82789 (Get with field index from pattern slice instead of directly indexing)
- rust-lang#82798 (Rename `rustdoc` to `rustdoc::all`)
- rust-lang#82804 (std: Fix a bug on the wasm32-wasi target opening files)
- rust-lang#82943 (Demonstrate best practice for feeding stdin of a child processes)
- rust-lang#83066 (Add `reverse` search alias for Iterator::rev())
- rust-lang#83070 (Update cargo)
- rust-lang#83081 (Fix panic message of `assert_failed_inner`)
Failed merges:
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors
bors merged commit 54546a8 into rust-lang:masterMar 14, 2021
@rustbotrustbot added this to the 1.52.0 milestone Mar 14, 2021
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@joshtriplettjoshtriplettjoshtriplett left review comments
@ibraheemdevibraheemdevibraheemdev requested changes

Assignees

@joshtriplettjoshtriplett

Labels

S-waiting-on-borsStatus: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

1.52.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@Seppel3210@rust-highfive@joshtriplett@bors@ibraheemdev@rustbot