Skip to content

Miscellaneous cleanup/refactoring in resolve and syntax::ext #38171

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Closed
wants to merge 0 commits into from

Conversation

jseyfried
Copy link
Contributor

r? @nrc

@@ -475,8 +475,6 @@ pub struct MacroDef {
pub attrs: HirVec<Attribute>,
pub id: NodeId,
pub span: Span,
pub imported_from: Option<Name>,
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This was always None due to #37213.

@jseyfried jseyfried force-pushed the cleanup branch 4 times, most recently from e8a6dfa to 63cfb39 Compare December 12, 2016 10:27
@jseyfried jseyfried force-pushed the cleanup branch 2 times, most recently from 1331be9 to 33e2ea3 Compare December 14, 2016 05:42
@@ -160,7 +155,13 @@ pub struct PathSegment {
/// this is more than just simple syntactic sugar; the use of
/// parens affects the region binding rules, so we preserve the
/// distinction.
pub parameters: PathParameters,
pub parameters: Option<P<PathParameters>>,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does this introduce distinction between segment and segment::<> or is it purely a size optimization?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I amended so that it is purely a size optimization.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you add a comment telling that this is a size optimization and what None means?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@jseyfried jseyfried Dec 15, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done.

@jseyfried jseyfried force-pushed the cleanup branch 2 times, most recently from eaff87f to 6d7f6e5 Compare December 18, 2016 07:00
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Dec 18, 2016

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #38369) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@nrc
Copy link
Member

nrc commented Dec 19, 2016

r=me with the comment @petrochenkov requested

@jseyfried
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors r=nrc

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Dec 19, 2016

📌 Commit f705c69 has been approved by nrc

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Dec 20, 2016

⌛ Testing commit f705c69 with merge 5a825c8...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Dec 20, 2016

💔 Test failed - auto-win-msvc-64-opt

@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

alexcrichton commented Dec 20, 2016 via email

alexcrichton added a commit to alexcrichton/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2016
Miscellaneous cleanup/refactoring in `resolve` and `syntax::ext`

r? @nrc
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Dec 20, 2016

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #38271) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@jseyfried
Copy link
Contributor Author

This merged in #38499.

@jseyfried jseyfried closed this Dec 21, 2016
@jseyfried jseyfried deleted the cleanup branch December 21, 2016 04:33
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants