Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Recover suggestions to introduce named lifetime under NLL - #96409
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Method moved as a free standing function
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note was originally in suggest_adding_lifetime_params but by moving it here we can avoid having the note under NLL.
However if we do want the note, I can just move it back to where it comes from
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm. The note is kind of redundant with the NLL error output, I guess.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm. The note is kind of redundant with the NLL error output, I guess.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
bors
commented
Apr 27, 2022
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #96459) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
cee7629 to
2c94218Comparejackh726
commented
Apr 28, 2022
@bors r+ |
bors
commented
Apr 28, 2022
📌 Commit 2c94218 has been approved by |
…-lifetime-suggestion, r=jackh726 Recover suggestions to introduce named lifetime under NLL Fixesrust-lang#96157 r? `@jackh726` Built on top of rust-lang#96385 so only the second commit is relevant
…-lifetime-suggestion, r=jackh726 Recover suggestions to introduce named lifetime under NLL Fixesrust-lang#96157 r? ``@jackh726`` Built on top of rust-lang#96385 so only the second commit is relevant
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#95312 (Ensure that `'_` and GAT yields errors) - rust-lang#96405 (Migrate ambiguous plus diagnostic to the new derive macro) - rust-lang#96409 (Recover suggestions to introduce named lifetime under NLL) - rust-lang#96433 (rustc_ast: Harmonize delimiter naming with `proc_macro::Delimiter`) - rust-lang#96480 (Fixed grammatical error in example comment) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Fixes#96157
r? @jackh726
Built on top of #96385 so only the second commit is relevant