WIP: mut_mut: generalize the from-expansion check
#15419
Closed
Conversation
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
|
r? @Alexendoo rustbot has assigned @Alexendoo. Use |
1eaa400 to
5982c1a
Compare
Alexendoo
reviewed
Aug 10, 2025
5982c1a to
d2e8b17
Compare
d2e8b17 to
bbcaeb5
Compare
|
r? clippy |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
|
@Centri3 friendly ping |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (possibly 98a92bf) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The check was added in #1032, which addressed #939, which did complain about the particular case of a for-loop. But for some reason, the fix also concentrated on for-loops only. I'm pretty sure
Span::from_expansionis more generally helpful.WIP because this apparently also stops the lint from firing on the
inline!proc-macro thing, which I'm not quite sure is correct?.. That would resolve #15417 (comment) though I guesschangelog: none