Explaining the reason why validation is performed in to_str of path.rs#63184
Merged
bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom Aug 6, 2019
Merged
Explaining the reason why validation is performed in to_str of path.rs#63184bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
Conversation
Contributor
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @Kimundi (or someone else) soon. If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
Centril
reviewed
Aug 1, 2019
…dation step Co-Authored-By: Mazdak Farrokhzad <twingoow@gmail.com>
Contributor
|
r? @sfackler |
Member
|
@bors r+ rollup |
Collaborator
|
📌 Commit 1aa4a57 has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 5, 2019
Explaining the reason why validation is performed in to_str of path.rs I thought it's good to explain the reason for the validation during the conversion between Path/PathBuffer into str, which explains the reason for returning an Option at this point (good for beginners who are reading through the docs).
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
Explaining the reason why validation is performed in to_str of path.rs I thought it's good to explain the reason for the validation during the conversion between Path/PathBuffer into str, which explains the reason for returning an Option at this point (good for beginners who are reading through the docs).
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
Explaining the reason why validation is performed in to_str of path.rs I thought it's good to explain the reason for the validation during the conversion between Path/PathBuffer into str, which explains the reason for returning an Option at this point (good for beginners who are reading through the docs).
Centril
added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
Explaining the reason why validation is performed in to_str of path.rs I thought it's good to explain the reason for the validation during the conversion between Path/PathBuffer into str, which explains the reason for returning an Option at this point (good for beginners who are reading through the docs).
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 6, 2019
Rollup of 14 pull requests Successful merges: - #61457 (Implement DoubleEndedIterator for iter::{StepBy, Peekable, Take}) - #63017 (Remove special code-path for handing unknown tokens) - #63184 (Explaining the reason why validation is performed in to_str of path.rs) - #63230 (Make use of possibly uninitialized data [E0381] a hard error) - #63260 (fix UB in a test) - #63264 (Revert "Rollup merge of #62696 - chocol4te:fix_#62194, r=estebank") - #63272 (Some more libsyntax::attr cleanup) - #63285 (Remove leftover AwaitOrigin) - #63287 (Don't store &Span) - #63293 (Clarify align_to's requirements and obligations) - #63295 (improve align_offset docs) - #63299 (Make qualify consts in_projection use PlaceRef) - #63312 (doc: fix broken sentence) - #63315 (Fix #63313) Failed merges: r? @ghost
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I thought it's good to explain the reason for the validation during the conversion between Path/PathBuffer into str, which explains the reason for returning an Option at this point (good for beginners who are reading through the docs).