Skip to content

Add documentation for Ipv6MulticastScope #86936

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 2, 2021

Conversation

CDirkx
Copy link
Contributor

@CDirkx CDirkx commented Jul 7, 2021

Adds basic documentation to the unstable Ipv6MulticastScope, as well as marking it #[non_exhaustive] because future IETF RFCs may introduce additional scopes. The documentation mentions this in a section "Stability Guarantees":

/// Not all possible values for a multicast scope have been assigned.
/// Future RFCs may introduce new scopes, which will be added as variants to this enum;
/// because of this the enum is marked as #[non_exhaustive].

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @m-ou-se

(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 Jul 7, 2021
@rustbot rustbot added the A-io Area: `std::io`, `std::fs`, `std::net` and `std::path` label Jul 7, 2021
Copy link
Member

@JohnTitor JohnTitor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The documentation itself looks good and the reason of #[non_exhaustive] makes sense to me.

@JohnTitor
Copy link
Member

@m-ou-se This has an unstable breaking change, does it need a review from t-libs-api or could I r+ it?

@JohnCSimon JohnCSimon added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 31, 2021
@m-ou-se
Copy link
Member

m-ou-se commented Aug 1, 2021

This has an unstable breaking change, does it need a review from t-libs-api or could I r+ it?

Changing unstable things is usually fine. If it's a popular API or the change is somewhat controversial, it'd be good to get the team involved.

@bors r=JohnTitor

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Aug 1, 2021

📌 Commit a674ae6 has been approved by JohnTitor

@bors bors 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 Aug 1, 2021
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Aug 2, 2021
Rollup of 13 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#86183 (Change environment variable getters to error recoverably)
 - rust-lang#86439 (Remove `Ipv4Addr::is_ietf_protocol_assignment`)
 - rust-lang#86509 (Move `os_str_bytes` to `sys::unix`)
 - rust-lang#86593 (Partially stabilize `const_slice_first_last`)
 - rust-lang#86936 (Add documentation for `Ipv6MulticastScope`)
 - rust-lang#87282 (Ensure `./x.py dist` adheres to `build.tools`)
 - rust-lang#87468 (Update rustfmt)
 - rust-lang#87504 (Update mdbook.)
 - rust-lang#87608 (Remove unused field `Session.system_library_path`)
 - rust-lang#87629 (Consistent spelling of "adapter" in the standard library)
 - rust-lang#87633 (Update compiler_builtins to fix i128 shift/mul on thumbv6m)
 - rust-lang#87644 (Recommend `swap_remove` in `Vec::remove` docs)
 - rust-lang#87653 (mark a UB doctest as no_run)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit f386ae3 into rust-lang:master Aug 2, 2021
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.56.0 milestone Aug 2, 2021
@CDirkx CDirkx deleted the ipv6-multicast branch September 3, 2021 15:37
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
A-io Area: `std::io`, `std::fs`, `std::net` and `std::path` S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants