Use extend when creating the lint pass constructors
#15994
Conversation
rustbot
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
Jarcho
force-pushed
the
lint_passes
branch
2 times, most recently
from
5b13034 to
f5e4a01
Compare
|
@blyxyas what do you think? The approach seems to offer us optimal sizing (because we know the array length up front) and good perf. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
| format!("Box::new(move |{ctor_arg}| Box::new({module_name}::{camel_name}::new(conf))),\n ",) | ||
| } else { | ||
| format!("store.register_{lint_pass}_pass(|{ctor_arg}| Box::new({module_name}::{camel_name}));\n ",) | ||
| format!("Box::new(|{ctor_arg}| Box::new({module_name}::{camel_name})),\n ",) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason why those spaces are there? (After \n)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess it's to start the next line with the right amount of indentation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah. It's so the marker comment stays indented.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In that case, +1 to the merge after the conflicts are resolved
|
r=me after a rebase |
|
This PR was rebased onto a different master commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed. Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers. |
rustbot
removed
the
S-waiting-on-review
4 participants
Alternative to part of #14509.
changelog: none