Tighten spans for bad fields in struct deriving Copy
#97722
Conversation
rustbot
added
the
T-compiler
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
@bors r+ |
|
📌 Commit 4c6a6bc has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
@Dylan-DPC Reading this comment, I guess @compiler-errors wanted to confirm it to @estebank. |
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#96642 (Avoid zero-sized allocs in ThinBox if T and H are both ZSTs.) - rust-lang#97647 (Lazily allocate and initialize pthread locks.) - rust-lang#97715 (Support the `#[expect]` attribute on fn parameters (RFC-2383)) - rust-lang#97716 (Fix reachability analysis for const methods) - rust-lang#97722 (Tighten spans for bad fields in struct deriving `Copy`) Failed merges: r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
Yes, @JohnTitor is correct. @Dylan-DPC, please be careful about r+'ing PRs that might need or want review from specific people, regardless of the size of the PR. |
|
sure looked trivial enough :P and any changes can be made over it later without much disruption :) |
It does mean we have to make another PR and the master branch would have a possible wrong change until another change lands, though. Any urgent PRs will be handled by the relevant team in general so you don't have to rush r+'ing PRs, I think. |
7 participants
r? @estebank
Closes #89137 for good, I think
Not sure if this is what you were looking for in #89137 (comment)