From 261ca04c925e1844bbd3525168d129055637e60e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicholas-Baron Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 13:24:55 -0800 Subject: Changed unwrap_or to unwrap_or_else in some places. The discussion seems to have resolved that this lint is a bit "noisy" in that applying it in all places would result in a reduction in readability. A few of the trivial functions (like `Path::new`) are fine to leave outside of closures. The general rule seems to be that anything that is obviously an allocation (`Box`, `Vec`, `vec![]`) should be in a closure, even if it is a 0-sized allocation. --- compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src/intrinsic.rs | 14 ++++++++------ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) (limited to 'compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src') diff --git a/compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src/intrinsic.rs b/compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src/intrinsic.rs index 4f999f8b560..d52b3be8cd3 100644 --- a/compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src/intrinsic.rs +++ b/compiler/rustc_codegen_llvm/src/intrinsic.rs @@ -979,12 +979,14 @@ fn generic_simd_intrinsic( // Integer vector : let (i_xn, in_elem_bitwidth) = match in_elem.kind() { - ty::Int(i) => { - (args[0].immediate(), i.bit_width().unwrap_or(bx.data_layout().pointer_size.bits())) - } - ty::Uint(i) => { - (args[0].immediate(), i.bit_width().unwrap_or(bx.data_layout().pointer_size.bits())) - } + ty::Int(i) => ( + args[0].immediate(), + i.bit_width().unwrap_or_else(|| bx.data_layout().pointer_size.bits()), + ), + ty::Uint(i) => ( + args[0].immediate(), + i.bit_width().unwrap_or_else(|| bx.data_layout().pointer_size.bits()), + ), _ => return_error!( "vector argument `{}`'s element type `{}`, expected integer element type", in_ty, -- cgit 1.4.1-3-g733a5