| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
This reverts commit 65cd843ae06ad00123c131a431ed5304e4cd577a, reversing
changes made to d255c6a57c393db6221b1ff700daea478436f1cd.
|
|
This improves parallel rustc parallelism by avoiding the bottleneck after each individual `par_body_owners` (because it needs to wait for queries to finish, so if there is one long running one, a lot of cores will be idle while waiting for the single query).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Update tests
|
|
When encountering a bare assignment in a let-chain, suggest turning the
assignment into a `let` expression or an equality check.
```
error: expected expression, found `let` statement
--> $DIR/bad-if-let-suggestion.rs:5:8
|
LL | if let x = 1 && i = 2 {}
| ^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: only supported directly in conditions of `if` and `while` expressions
help: you might have meant to continue the let-chain
|
LL | if let x = 1 && let i = 2 {}
| +++
help: you might have meant to compare for equality
|
LL | if let x = 1 && i == 2 {}
| +
```
|
|
Co-authored-by: Adrian <adrian.iosdev@gmail.com>
|
|
- Add doc comment to new type
- Restore "only supported directly in conditions of `if` and `while` expressions" note
- Rename variant with clearer name
|
|
Previously some invalid let expressions would result in both a feature
error and a parsing error. Avoid this and ensure that we only emit the
parsing error when this happens.
|
|
There was an incomplete version of the check in parsing and a second
version in AST validation. This meant that some, but not all, invalid
uses were allowed inside macros/disabled cfgs. It also means that later
passes have a hard time knowing when the let expression is in a valid
location, sometimes causing ICEs.
- Add a field to ExprKind::Let in AST/HIR to mark whether it's in a
valid location.
- Suppress later errors and MIR construction for invalid let
expressions.
|
|
|
