Skip to content

code format #39881

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 15, 2017
Merged

code format #39881

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 15, 2017

Conversation

king6cong
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @brson

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

malbarbo
malbarbo reviewed Feb 16, 2017
View reviewed changes
src/libcore/iter/iterator.rs Outdated
/// and "comparison" function.
///
/// This is an idiosyncratic helper to try to factor out the
/// commonalities of {max,min}{,_by}. In particular, this avoids
/// having to implement optimizations several times.
#[inline]
fn select_fold1<I,B, FProj, FCmp>(mut it: I,
fn select_fold1<I, B, FProj, FCmp>(mut it: I,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unaligned parameters

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oops, updated using rustfmt

@mrhota
Copy link
Contributor

mrhota commented Mar 28, 2017

@brson ping

@nagisa
Copy link
Member

nagisa commented Apr 7, 2017

There are some debatable changes esp wrt the where clauses. I think this is the primary reason why the whole codebase not rustfmtd yet. We're also waiting for style RFCs to conclude.

@shepmaster
Copy link
Member

shepmaster commented Apr 14, 2017 •
edited
Loading

esp wrt the where clauses

If theres just a few primary concerns (like where clauses) perhaps the author could remove those specific ones and get the PR merged. @nagisa do you know which specific things are objectionable?

Also, if it's just a matter of running clippy rustfmt again after the RFC style is approved, then perhaps the biggest downside would just be some (acceptable?) amount of churn?

@king6cong
Copy link
Contributor Author

@shepmaster yeah, I will update this PR later tomorrow. Night in Beijing and girlfriend urging me to sleep :)

@king6cong
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated

@japaric
Copy link
Member

japaric commented Apr 15, 2017

I didn't see the previous version but the current changes look uncontroversial. Thanks for the PR, @king6cong.

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 15, 2017

📌 Commit 7c8ca80 has been approved by japaric

@arielb1 arielb1 added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Apr 15, 2017
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 15, 2017

⌛ Testing commit 7c8ca80 with merge 516ca25...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 15, 2017
@bors
Auto merge of #39881 - king6cong:sys, r=japaric
516ca25 
code format
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 15, 2017

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: japaric
Pushing 516ca25 to master...

@bors bors merged commit 7c8ca80 into rust-lang:master Apr 15, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@malbarbo malbarbo malbarbo left review comments

Assignees

@brson brson

Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
10 participants
@king6cong @rust-highfive @mrhota @nagisa @shepmaster @japaric @bors @malbarbo @brson @arielb1