-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.2k
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
Remove T: Sized
on ptr::is_null()
#46094
Conversation
This reverts commit 604f049. This is purely a revert of cuviper's revert "Restore `T: Sized` on `ptr::is_null`". So double revert means this is code written by cuviper!
@rfcbot fcp merge |
Team member @dtolnay has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged teams: No concerns currently listed. Once these reviewers reach consensus, this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me. |
Ping @BurntSushi, waiting on your ticky box here! |
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
1 similar comment
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
@bors: r+ |
📌 Commit e0f58c6 has been approved by |
Remove `T: Sized` on `ptr::is_null()` Originally from #44932 -- this is purely a revert of the last commit of that PR, which was removing some changes from the previous commits in the PR. So a revert of a revert means this is code written by @cuviper! @mikeyhew makes a compelling case in rust-lang/rfcs#433 (comment) for why this is the right way to implement `is_null` for trait objects. And the behavior for slices makes sense to me as well. ```diff impl<T: ?Sized> *const T { - pub fn is_null(self) -> bool where T: Sized; + pub fn is_null(self) -> bool; } impl<T: ?Sized> *mut T { - pub fn is_null(self) -> bool where T: Sized; + pub fn is_null(self) -> bool; }
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
This was already true, as we require rust-lang/rust#46094 to compile. This commit ensures that we test for this on CI so we know if this changes in the future.
Originally from #44932 -- this is purely a revert of the last commit of that PR, which was removing some changes from the previous commits in the PR. So a revert of a revert means this is code written by @cuviper!
@mikeyhew makes a compelling case in rust-lang/rfcs#433 (comment) for why this is the right way to implement
is_null
for trait objects. And the behavior for slices makes sense to me as well.