-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.9k
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
Stabilize dyn trait #49968
Stabilize dyn trait #49968
Conversation
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #50003) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Your PR failed on Travis (raw log). Through arcane magic we have determined that the following fragments from the build log may contain information about the problem. Click to expand the log.
I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #50121) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
The job Click to expand the log.
I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
@TimNN btw that message doesn't seem to include the error =) |
I'm having trouble with llvm, I'm going to rebuild everything from scratch |
@nikomatsakis I think we are ready |
r=me once travis is happy |
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 3b34dbf has been approved by |
The job Click to expand the log.
I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
@bors r- -- travis |
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 545f5f5 has been approved by |
⌛ Testing commit 545f5f5574a06896611508ad4406b97702b5d081 with merge 5264567ea97ef1cb749cf53543dfcf1c99d1fa7c... |
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@nikomatsakis I think it's ready |
@bors r=nikomatsakis |
📌 Commit b5c7cbf has been approved by |
…komatsakis Stabilize dyn trait This PR stabilizes RFC 2113. I followed the [stabilization guide](https://forge.rust-lang.org/stabilization-guide.html). Related issue: rust-lang#49218
Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - #49858 (std: Mark `ptr::Unique` with `#[doc(hidden)]`) - #49968 (Stabilize dyn trait) - #50192 (Add some utilities to `libsyntax`) - #50251 (rustc: Disable threads in LLD for wasm) - #50263 (rustc: Emit `uwtable` for allocator shims) - #50269 (Update `parking_lot` dependencies) - #50273 (Allow #[inline] on closures) - #50284 (fix search load page failure) - #50257 (Don't ICE on tuple struct ctor with incorrect arg count) Failed merges:
Not sure if this is the best place to ask, but in the future, when a sub-feature is split off for separate stabilization, can we please ensure that docs PRs are filed for the sub-feature as a prerequisite? We have rust-lang/reference#279 for |
@alercah for the stuff relating to the edition, we relaxed the requirement to "file an issue". I made issues for everything in RBE and the book, but I thought yinz were handling the reference your own way. If it's easier, you all may want to copy over https://github.com/rust-lang/book/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22Blocking+Rust+2018%22, or I'm happy to do it too, whatever works for you all. that being said, yeah, when stuff gets split off, commenting in those issues about it would be 👍 |
Oops sorry, yes, I meant issues, not PRs. @matthewjasper filed a number of issues for the reference for Rust 2018 features, and that's good, but there are always going to be stabilizations that aren't planned out like that. So the point that I was trying to make subtly, and apparently failed at because I mixed things up, was that I think that at some point someone should have asked "Do necessary issues exist on docs repositories?" before this got merged. It's not clear to me that it wasn't because we already have one for As a side note, the stabilization guide needs updating, which would probably reduce the likelihood of future miscommunication. |
yes please! Agree 1000%. |
This PR stabilizes RFC 2113. I followed the stabilization guide.
Related issue: #49218