Rollup of 5 pull requests #5527
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Downgrade match_bool to pedantic I don't quite buy the justification in https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/. The justification is: > It makes the code less readable. In the Rust codebases I've worked in, I have found people were comfortable using `match bool` (selectively) to make code more readable. For example, initializing struct fields is a place where the indentation of `match` can work better than the indentation of `if`: ```rust let _ = Struct { v: { ... }, w: match doing_w { true => ..., false => ..., }, x: Nested { c: ..., b: ..., a: ..., }, y: if doing_y { ... } else { // :( ... }, z: ..., }; ``` Or sometimes people prefer something a bit less pithy than `if` when the meaning of the bool doesn't read off clearly from the condition: ```rust if set.insert(...) { ... // ??? } else { ... } match set.insert(...) { // set.insert returns false if already present false => ..., true => ..., } ``` Or `match` can be a better fit when the bool is playing the role more of a value than a branch condition: ```rust impl ErrorCodes { pub fn from(b: bool) -> Self { match b { true => ErrorCodes::Yes, false => ErrorCodes::No, } } } ``` And then there's plain old it's-1-line-shorter, which means we get 25% more content on a screen when stacking a sequence of conditions: ```rust let old_noun = match old_binding.is_import() { true => "import", false => "definition", }; let new_participle = match new_binding.is_import() { true => "imported", false => "defined", }; ``` Bottom line is I think this lint fits the bill better as a pedantic lint; I don't think linting on this by default is justified. changelog: Remove match_bool from default set of enabled lints
…hiaskrgr Avoid running cargo+internal lints when not enabled r? @matthiaskrgr changelog: none
Add a note to the beta sections of release.md changelog: none
…hearth Deploy time travel Since not only commits to the master branch, but also tags and the beta branch are deployed, we have to be cautious which version of the deploy script is used. GHA always runs the workflow that is commited on the `ref`, that gets tested. For tagged commits. this is 6 weeks outdated workflows/scripts. To prevent this, this workflow first checks out the deploy.sh script, the website templates and all python scripts generating files for the website. changelog: none
…, r=flip1995 Add lifetime test case for `new_ret_no_self` cc rust-lang#734 (comment) changelog: none
|
@bors p=1 |
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 9b882ba has been approved by |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Successful merges:
new_ret_no_self#5523 (Add lifetime test case fornew_ret_no_self)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
changelog: rollup