Skip to content

Bring back beginning_vert field to ast::Arm #48313

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 1 commit into from

Conversation

topecongiro
Copy link
Contributor

beginning_vert field was removed from ast::Arm in the stabilization PR, but rustfmt needs this to properly format a match arm with | at the beginning, so please bring this back!

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @eddyb

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Feb 18, 2018
@goodmanjonathan
Copy link
Contributor

Heh, sorry about that!

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

@topecongiro
How rustfmt deals with trailing commas and other separators? We don't keep them in AST.
The starting | is exactly equivalent to them.

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

I'd rather not add this | into AST without treating other trailing separators consistently.
IIRC, you can check for the presence of | by searching in the codemap, even if it's not in AST.

@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member

@eddyb (or someone else from @rust-lang/compiler), can we get a review on this PR?

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

There's a review above.

@pietroalbini
Copy link
Member

Oh, woops!

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

I'll go ahead and close then.

@eddyb
Copy link
Member

eddyb commented Feb 26, 2018

r? @petrochenkov

@eddyb
Copy link
Member

eddyb commented Feb 26, 2018

Sorry, GitHub didn't update.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants