fix UB in a test #63260
Merged
fix UB in a test #63260
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
|
r? @Kimundi (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
matklad
reviewed
Aug 5, 2019
Co-Authored-By: Aleksey Kladov <[email protected]>
|
r? matklad @bors r+ rollup (I am not an expert in this area, but change seems simple and fine to me, so I want to r+. Please tell me if I am using r+ right incorrectly :) ) |
|
📌 Commit 4e51ef7 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
r? @matklad |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
matklad
reviewed
Aug 5, 2019
|
bors r- (I don't know if bors's smart enough to not schedule a merge is PR checks fail) |
|
@bors r- |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-author
It is not. |
Co-Authored-By: Aleksey Kladov <[email protected]>
|
@bors r=matklad |
|
📌 Commit 90b95cf has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
r? @matklad |
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 5, 2019
fix UB in a test We used to compare two mutable references that were supposed to point to the same thing. That's no good. Compare them as raw pointers instead.
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
fix UB in a test We used to compare two mutable references that were supposed to point to the same thing. That's no good. Compare them as raw pointers instead.
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
fix UB in a test We used to compare two mutable references that were supposed to point to the same thing. That's no good. Compare them as raw pointers instead.
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
fix UB in a test We used to compare two mutable references that were supposed to point to the same thing. That's no good. Compare them as raw pointers instead.
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
Rollup of 14 pull requests Successful merges: - #61457 (Implement DoubleEndedIterator for iter::{StepBy, Peekable, Take}) - #63017 (Remove special code-path for handing unknown tokens) - #63184 (Explaining the reason why validation is performed in to_str of path.rs) - #63230 (Make use of possibly uninitialized data [E0381] a hard error) - #63260 (fix UB in a test) - #63264 (Revert "Rollup merge of #62696 - chocol4te:fix_#62194, r=estebank") - #63272 (Some more libsyntax::attr cleanup) - #63285 (Remove leftover AwaitOrigin) - #63287 (Don't store &Span) - #63293 (Clarify align_to's requirements and obligations) - #63295 (improve align_offset docs) - #63299 (Make qualify consts in_projection use PlaceRef) - #63312 (doc: fix broken sentence) - #63315 (Fix #63313) Failed merges: r? @ghost
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.
We used to compare two mutable references that were supposed to point to the same thing. That's no good.
Compare them as raw pointers instead.