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

Rollup of 5 pull requests #75765

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Aug 21, 2020
Merged

Rollup of 5 pull requests #75765

merged 12 commits into from
Aug 21, 2020

Conversation

JohnTitor
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost

ericseppanen and others added 12 commits August 8, 2020 22:50
remove_dir will error if the path doesn't exist or isn't a directory.

It's useful to clarify that this is "remove dir or fail" not "remove dir
if it exists".

I don't think this belongs in the title. "Removes an existing, empty
directory" is strangely worded-- there's no such thing as a non-existing
directory.  Better to just say explicitly it will return an error.
Use two printlns when testing that writing to a closed stdout does not
panic. Otherwise the test is ineffective, since the current implementation
silently ignores the error during first println regardless.
Can't link from `core` to `std` yet.
One of the original links was linking to the wrong thing as well.

Co-authored-by: Joshua Nelson <joshua@yottadb.com>
clarify documentation of remove_dir errors

remove_dir will error if the path doesn't exist or isn't a directory.

It's useful to clarify that this is "remove dir or fail" not "remove dir
if it exists".

I don't think this belongs in the title. "Removes an existing, empty
directory" is strangely worded-- there's no such thing as a non-existing
directory.  Better to just say explicitly it will return an error.
Fix RFC-1014 test

Use two printlns when testing that writing to a closed stdout does not
panic. Otherwise the test is ineffective, since the current implementation
silently ignores the error during first println regardless.
…sult, r=jyn514

Switch to intra-doc links in `core::result`

Part of rust-lang#75080.

@rustbot modify labels: A-intra-doc-links T-doc T-rustdoc
…, r=jyn514

Move to intra doc links for std::thread documentation

Helps with rust-lang#75080.

@rustbot modify labels: T-doc, A-intra-doc-links, T-rustdoc

r? @jyn514
@JohnTitor
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ p=5 rollup=never
@rustbot modify labels: +rollup

@rustbot rustbot added the rollup A PR which is a rollup label Aug 21, 2020
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 21, 2020

📌 Commit 2a7f868 has been approved by JohnTitor

@bors bors added the S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. label Aug 21, 2020
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 21, 2020

⌛ Testing commit 2a7f868 with merge 32cb8d4...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 21, 2020

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions, checks-azure
Approved by: JohnTitor
Pushing 32cb8d4 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Aug 21, 2020
@bors bors merged commit 32cb8d4 into rust-lang:master Aug 21, 2020
@JohnTitor JohnTitor deleted the rollup-lexaoa9 branch August 21, 2020 11:12
@cuviper cuviper added this to the 1.47.0 milestone May 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants