Remove option_payload_ptr; redundant to offset_of#117525
Merged
bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom Nov 18, 2023
Merged
Remove option_payload_ptr; redundant to offset_of#117525bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
Conversation
Collaborator
|
(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Contributor
Author
rustbot
added
S-blocked
GKFX
force-pushed
the
remove_option_payload_ptr
branch
from
e3ced15 to
661df4f
Compare
Collaborator
|
Some changes occurred to MIR optimizations cc @rust-lang/wg-mir-opt |
Contributor
Author
|
@rustbot ready |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
petrochenkov
added
S-waiting-on-author
Contributor
Author
|
@rustbot ready |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Contributor
|
@bors r+ |
Collaborator
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Collaborator
Collaborator
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
This was referenced Nov 18, 2023
Collaborator
|
Finished benchmarking commit (33688d2): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)ResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 678.285s -> 676.282s (-0.30%) |
jhpratt
added a commit
to jhpratt/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2025
…ix, r=scottmcm Option::as_slice: fix comment The implementation got changed in rust-lang#117525 without updating the comment. Now the comment makes no sense any more since there is no intrinsic that returns a pointer in this function any more. (It is also very strange to say "in the new version" in a comment -- what is that supposed to tell someone reading the code 2 years later? That wording was introduced even earlier, in rust-lang#109179.) Cc `@GKFX` `@petrochenkov` `@llogiq` `@scottmcm`
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2025
Rollup merge of #144230 - RalfJung:option-as-slice-comment-fix, r=scottmcm Option::as_slice: fix comment The implementation got changed in #117525 without updating the comment. Now the comment makes no sense any more since there is no intrinsic that returns a pointer in this function any more. (It is also very strange to say "in the new version" in a comment -- what is that supposed to tell someone reading the code 2 years later? That wording was introduced even earlier, in #109179.) Cc `@GKFX` `@petrochenkov` `@llogiq` `@scottmcm`
Muscraft
pushed a commit
to Muscraft/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2025
…ix, r=scottmcm Option::as_slice: fix comment The implementation got changed in rust-lang#117525 without updating the comment. Now the comment makes no sense any more since there is no intrinsic that returns a pointer in this function any more. (It is also very strange to say "in the new version" in a comment -- what is that supposed to tell someone reading the code 2 years later? That wording was introduced even earlier, in rust-lang#109179.) Cc `@GKFX` `@petrochenkov` `@llogiq` `@scottmcm`
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
to rust-lang/miri
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 22, 2025
…ttmcm Option::as_slice: fix comment The implementation got changed in rust-lang/rust#117525 without updating the comment. Now the comment makes no sense any more since there is no intrinsic that returns a pointer in this function any more. (It is also very strange to say "in the new version" in a comment -- what is that supposed to tell someone reading the code 2 years later? That wording was introduced even earlier, in rust-lang/rust#109179.) Cc `@GKFX` `@petrochenkov` `@llogiq` `@scottmcm`
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.
The
option_payload_ptrintrinsic is no longer required asoffset_ofsupports traversing enums (#114208). This PR removes it in order to dogfood offset_of (as suggested at #106655 (comment)). However, it will not build until those changes reach beta (which I think is within the next 8 days?) so I've opened it as a draft.