Skip to content
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.

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

Implement unstable new_range feature #136167

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 4, 2025
Merged

Implement unstable new_range feature #136167

merged 2 commits into from
Feb 4, 2025

Conversation

pitaj
Copy link
Contributor

@pitaj pitaj commented Jan 28, 2025

Switches a..b, a.., and a..=b to resolve to the new range types.

For rust-lang/rfcs#3550
Tracking issue #123741

also adds the re-export that was missed in the original implementation of new_range_api

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 28, 2025

r? @Nadrieril

rustbot has assigned @Nadrieril.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jan 28, 2025
Copy link
Member

@Nadrieril Nadrieril left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, just one nit.

if NEW_RANGE {
hir::LangItem::RangeInclusiveCopy
} else {
unreachable!() // Handled by lower_expr_range_closed
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: could you call lower_expr_range_closed here instead of in the match above?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah that's much cleaner, good point.

@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@Nadrieril
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 3, 2025

📌 Commit f530a29 has been approved by Nadrieril

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Feb 3, 2025
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2025
Rollup of 5 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#134777 (Enable more tests on Windows)
 - rust-lang#135621 (Move some std tests to integration tests)
 - rust-lang#135844 ( Add new tool for dumping feature status based on tidy )
 - rust-lang#136167 (Implement unstable `new_range` feature)
 - rust-lang#136334 (Extract `core::ffi` primitives to a separate (internal) module)

Failed merges:

 - rust-lang#136201 (Removed dependency on the field-offset crate, alternate approach)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit d31e137 into rust-lang:master Feb 4, 2025
6 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.86.0 milestone Feb 4, 2025
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2025
Rollup merge of rust-lang#136167 - pitaj:new_range, r=Nadrieril

Implement unstable `new_range` feature

Switches `a..b`, `a..`, and `a..=b` to resolve to the new range types.

For rust-lang/rfcs#3550
Tracking issue rust-lang#123741

also adds the re-export that was missed in the original implementation of `new_range_api`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants