Skip to content
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.

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

rustfmt librand #29117

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Oct 19, 2015
Merged

rustfmt librand #29117

merged 6 commits into from
Oct 19, 2015

Conversation

mseri
Copy link
Contributor

@mseri mseri commented Oct 17, 2015

r? @nrc

Re-submission of the closed PR #29054 with the additional rustfmt-zation of the full librand.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @nrc (or someone else) soon.

If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. The way Github handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

self.mem[i + 4] = e;
self.mem[i + 5] = f;
self.mem[i + 6] = g;
self.mem[i + 7] = h;
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lines 105-108 in the macro have not been touched, however the same block here has been reformatted. The same happened at line 370. Is this the expected behavior?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Rustfmt can't format macro definitions yet: https://github.com/nrc/rustfmt/issues/8

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should the macro stay in its compact form then, or is it better if it's re-formatted as the rest of the code?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's to good to be consistent, I think. I'd reformat the macro too, yea.

@nrc
Copy link
Member

nrc commented Oct 18, 2015

@bors: r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 18, 2015

📌 Commit 8a0b9c0 has been approved by nrc

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 18, 2015

⌛ Testing commit 8a0b9c0 with merge 9ed32bb...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 18, 2015
r? @nrc

Re-submission of the closed PR #29054 with the additional rustfmt-zation of the full librand.
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: retry force

@bors bors merged commit 8a0b9c0 into rust-lang:master Oct 19, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants