diff options
| author | bors <bors@rust-lang.org> | 2018-03-09 10:45:29 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bors <bors@rust-lang.org> | 2018-03-09 10:45:29 +0000 |
| commit | fedce67cd21dc08ece5a484fe1a060346acac98a (patch) | |
| tree | 2cc26079f1d4ee58c1bc38e326585013e52f7e6b /src/test/rustdoc/empty-section.rs | |
| parent | 2079a084df08c38eb4dbfc5c8de5c0245170c3d9 (diff) | |
| parent | 780b544a391fb2dc42d814ce8cb7e6ad3633fa39 (diff) | |
| download | rust-fedce67cd21dc08ece5a484fe1a060346acac98a.tar.gz rust-fedce67cd21dc08ece5a484fe1a060346acac98a.zip | |
Auto merge of #48326 - RalfJung:generic-bounds, r=petrochenkov
Warn about ignored generic bounds in `for` This adds a new lint to fix #42181. For consistency and to avoid code duplication, I also moved the existing "bounds in type aliases are ignored" here. Questions to the reviewer: * Is it okay to just remove a diagnostic error code like this? Should I instead keep the warning about type aliases where it is? The old code provided a detailed explanation of what's going on when asked, that information is now lost. On the other hand, `span_warn!` seems deprecated (after this patch, it has exactly one user left!). * Did I miss any syntactic construct that can appear as `for` in the surface syntax? I covered function types (`for<'a> fn(...)`), generic traits (`for <'a> Fn(...)`, can appear both as bounds as as trait objects) and bounds (`for<'a> F: ...`). * For the sake of backwards compatibility, this adds a warning, not an error. @nikomatsakis suggested an error in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/42181#issuecomment-306924389, but I feel that can only happen in a new epoch -- right? Cc @eddyb
Diffstat (limited to 'src/test/rustdoc/empty-section.rs')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions