Skip to content

Lambda expressions honor no struct literal restriction #43425

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
Sep 1, 2017
Merged

Lambda expressions honor no struct literal restriction #43425

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 1, 2017

Conversation

matklad
Copy link
Contributor

@matklad matklad commented Jul 23, 2017

This is a fix for #43412 if we decide that it is indeed a bug :)

closes #43412

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @pnkfelix

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

@carols10cents carols10cents added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jul 24, 2017
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

r? @eddyb, mind taking over the review here?

@rust-highfive rust-highfive assigned eddyb and unassigned pnkfelix Jul 27, 2017
@eddyb
Copy link
Member

eddyb commented Jul 28, 2017

@alexcrichton Sure, but #43412 needs a compiler (or maybe even lang team) decision first.

@aidanhs aidanhs added S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 3, 2017
@aidanhs aidanhs added S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). and removed S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). labels Aug 24, 2017
@shepmaster
Copy link
Member

@nikomatsakis ping! This has been idle for over two weeks, but is pending a team decision. I've also pinged Niko on IRC.

@eddyb
Copy link
Member

eddyb commented Aug 31, 2017

@bors r+

We decided to just accept this and back it out if any regressions are observed.

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Aug 31, 2017

📌 Commit 7054fe3 has been approved by eddyb

@nikomatsakis
Copy link
Contributor

We discussed briefly in the @rust-lang/compiler meeting (though these sorts of minor grammar questions are often tasked to @rust-lang/lang). Anyway @eddyb and I at least agree with @matklad that this behavior seems like a bug.

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Aug 31, 2017

⌛ Testing commit 7054fe3 with merge 69dbe66...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 31, 2017
@bors
Auto merge of #43425 - matklad:lambda-restrictions, r=eddyb
69dbe66 
Lambda expressions honor no struct literal restriction

This is a fix for #43412 if we decide that it is indeed a bug :)

closes #43412
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 1, 2017

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: eddyb
Pushing 69dbe66 to master...

@bors bors merged commit 7054fe3 into rust-lang:master Sep 1, 2017
@matklad matklad deleted the lambda-restrictions branch November 28, 2018 19:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@eddyb eddyb

Labels
S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

"No Struct Literal" restriction should be applied to lambda function body
10 participants
@matklad @rust-highfive @alexcrichton @eddyb @shepmaster @bors @nikomatsakis @pnkfelix @carols10cents @aidanhs