diff options
| author | Dylan DPC <99973273+Dylan-DPC@users.noreply.github.com> | 2022-03-31 17:29:52 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | GitHub <noreply@github.com> | 2022-03-31 17:29:52 +0200 |
| commit | 521c590c9f780227f3f6284cbecb727f121a9cb4 (patch) | |
| tree | 473ac3060d7cfec82f7b8ca505e6962afb651630 /compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc | |
| parent | 03314912f1361af6b39383958b5aa1b4aed61c26 (diff) | |
| parent | c74f7a310fe8fcf9a2edf927cee0bc15a3abe399 (diff) | |
| download | rust-521c590c9f780227f3f6284cbecb727f121a9cb4.tar.gz rust-521c590c9f780227f3f6284cbecb727f121a9cb4.zip | |
Rollup merge of #91416 - compiler-errors:infinite-ty-option-box, r=estebank
Specialize infinite-type "insert some indirection" suggestion for Option Suggest `Option<Box<_>>` instead of `Box<Option<_>>` for infinitely-recursive members of a struct. Not sure if I can get the span of the generic subty of the Option so I can make this a `+++`-style suggestion. The current output is a tiny bit less fancy looking than the original suggestion. Should I limit the specialization to just `Option<Box<TheOuterStruct>>`? Because right now it applies to all `Option` members in the struct that are returned by `Representability::SelfRecursive`. Fixes #91402 r? `@estebank` (since you wrote the original suggestion and are definitely most familiar with it!)
Diffstat (limited to 'compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions