Rename hir::ExprAgain to hir::ExprContinue #51727
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
rust-highfive
added
the
S-waiting-on-review
|
I can't believe somebody has finally done this 😆 |
|
📌 Commit 621047b has been approved by |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 23, 2018
Rename hir::ExprAgain to hir::ExprContinue The current name is confusing and historical. I also used this PR to clean up the annoying indentation in `check/mod.rs`. If that's viewed as too tangential a change, I'll split it up, but it seemed reasonable to slip it in to reduce @bors's work. It's easy to compare for the two commits individually. r? @petrochenkov
|
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 current name is confusing and historical.
I also used this PR to clean up the annoying indentation in
check/mod.rs. If that's viewed as too tangential a change, I'll split it up, but it seemed reasonable to slip it in to reduce @bors's work. It's easy to compare for the two commits individually.r? @petrochenkov