| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
Co-authored-by: Adrian <adrian.iosdev@gmail.com>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This test was ignored long ago in
https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/20578/ when the syntax for
closures was changed.
The current status is that a closure with an explicit `!` return type
will trigger the `unreachable_code` lint which appears to be the
original intent of the test
(https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/16836). A closure without a
return type won't trigger the lint since the `!` type isn't inferred
(AFAIK). This restores the test to its original form.
|
|
- remove unused (pun intentional) `continue`
- improve wording with assoc items in general
|
|
|
|
with repect to other dead code lints
|
|
Signed-off-by: Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
|
|
r=compiler-errors,davidtwco,estebank,oli-obk
diagnostics: if AssocFn has self argument, describe as method
Discussed in https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/147480-t-compiler.2Fwg-diagnostics/topic/.22associated.20function.22.20vs.20.22method.22/near/329265515
This commit also changes the tooltips on rustdoc intra-doc links targeting methods.
For anyone not sure why this is being done, see the Reference definitions of these terms in <https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.67.1/reference/items/associated-items.html#methods>
> Associated functions whose first parameter is named `self` are called methods and may be invoked using the [method call operator](https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.67.1/reference/expressions/method-call-expr.html), for example, `x.foo()`, as well as the usual function call notation.
In particular, while this means it's technically correct for rustc to refer to a method as an associated function (and there are a few cases where it'll still do so), rustc *must never* use the term "method" to refer to an associated function that does not have a `self` parameter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
