MIR building: Stop using unpack! for BlockAnd<()>#127472
Merged
bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom Jul 18, 2024
Merged
MIR building: Stop using unpack! for BlockAnd<()>#127472bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
unpack! for BlockAnd<()>#127472bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
Conversation
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Collaborator
|
Some changes occurred in match lowering cc @Nadrieril |
fmease
approved these changes
Jul 8, 2024
Member
fmease
left a comment
fmease
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have a suggestion which you don't necessarily need to take to heart.
r=fmease,Nadrieril if Nadrieril approves as well
This kind of unpacking can be expressed as an ordinary method on `BlockAnd<()>`.
Member
Author
|
Renamed |
Member
|
@bors r+ rollup |
Collaborator
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#125042 (Use ordinal number in argument error) - rust-lang#127229 (rustdoc: click target for sidebar items flush left) - rust-lang#127337 (Move a few intrinsics to Rust abi) - rust-lang#127472 (MIR building: Stop using `unpack!` for `BlockAnd<()>`) - rust-lang#127579 (Solve a error `.clone()` suggestion when moving a mutable reference) - rust-lang#127769 (Don't use implicit features in `Cargo.toml` in `compiler/`) - rust-lang#127844 (Remove invalid further restricting suggestion for type bound) - rust-lang#127855 (Add myself to review rotation) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#125042 (Use ordinal number in argument error) - rust-lang#127229 (rustdoc: click target for sidebar items flush left) - rust-lang#127337 (Move a few intrinsics to Rust abi) - rust-lang#127472 (MIR building: Stop using `unpack!` for `BlockAnd<()>`) - rust-lang#127579 (Solve a error `.clone()` suggestion when moving a mutable reference) - rust-lang#127769 (Don't use implicit features in `Cargo.toml` in `compiler/`) - rust-lang#127844 (Remove invalid further restricting suggestion for type bound) - rust-lang#127855 (Add myself to review rotation) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 8 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#125042 (Use ordinal number in argument error) - rust-lang#127229 (rustdoc: click target for sidebar items flush left) - rust-lang#127337 (Move a few intrinsics to Rust abi) - rust-lang#127472 (MIR building: Stop using `unpack!` for `BlockAnd<()>`) - rust-lang#127579 (Solve a error `.clone()` suggestion when moving a mutable reference) - rust-lang#127769 (Don't use implicit features in `Cargo.toml` in `compiler/`) - rust-lang#127844 (Remove invalid further restricting suggestion for type bound) - rust-lang#127855 (Add myself to review rotation) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#127472 - Zalathar:block-and-unit, r=fmease MIR building: Stop using `unpack!` for `BlockAnd<()>` This is a subset of rust-lang#127416, containing only the parts related to `BlockAnd<()>`. The first patch removes the non-assigning form of the `unpack!` macro, because it is frustratingly inconsistent with the main form. We can replace it with an ordinary method that discards the `()` and returns the block. The second patch then finds all of the remaining code that was using `unpack!` with `BlockAnd<()>`, and updates it to use that new method instead. --- Changes since original review of rust-lang#127416: - Renamed `fn unpack_block` → `fn into_block` - Removed `fn unpack_discard`, replacing it with `let _: BlockAnd<()> = ...` (2 occurrences) - Tweaked `arm_end_blocks` to unpack earlier and build `Vec<BasicBlock>` instead of `Vec<BlockAnd<()>>`
Member
|
Whoops I hadn't seen that you were waiting for me. LGTM, thx for merging 👍 |
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
5 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.
This is a subset of #127416, containing only the parts related to
BlockAnd<()>.The first patch removes the non-assigning form of the
unpack!macro, because it is frustratingly inconsistent with the main form. We can replace it with an ordinary method that discards the()and returns the block.The second patch then finds all of the remaining code that was using
unpack!withBlockAnd<()>, and updates it to use that new method instead.Changes since original review of #127416:
fn unpack_block→fn into_blockfn unpack_discard, replacing it withlet _: BlockAnd<()> = ...(2 occurrences)arm_end_blocksto unpack earlier and buildVec<BasicBlock>instead ofVec<BlockAnd<()>>