Skip to content

Conversation

@lukaslueg
Copy link
Contributor

@lukaslueg lukaslueg commented Sep 18, 2025

Fixes #15404

changelog: [result_large_err]: Add large_error_ignored configuration

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties label Sep 18, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Sep 18, 2025

r? @dswij

rustbot has assigned @dswij.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

Comment on lines +114 to 119
if let ty::Adt(adt, _) = err_ty.kind()
&& large_err_ignored.contains(&adt.did())
{
return;
}
if let ty::Adt(adt, subst) = err_ty.kind()
Copy link
Contributor

@ada4a ada4a Sep 20, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe integrate this check into the let-chain?

if let ty::Adt(adt, subst) = err_ty.kind()
    && !large_err_ignored.contains(&adt.did())
    && /* rest of the let-chain.. */

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nitpicked about that, but that would complicate the else-clause

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah, I see what you mean. Then maybe put this check inside the then-block?

This doesn't really matter of course – it's just that it looks a bit strange to me to check for err_ty being an ADT twice

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I agree, yet all variants come down to some duplication, so I'd rather leave it as it

@dswij
Copy link
Member

dswij commented Oct 6, 2025

r? clippy

@rustbot rustbot assigned llogiq and unassigned dswij Oct 6, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 13, 2025

☔ The latest upstream changes (possibly a8d1258) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

result_large_err difficult to suppress selectively

5 participants