-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
Remove T: Sized
on ptr::is_null()
#46094
Conversation
This reverts commit 604f049. This is purely a revert of cuviper's revert "Restore `T: Sized` on `ptr::is_null`". So double revert means this is code written by cuviper!
@rfcbot fcp merge |
Team member @dtolnay has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged teams: No concerns currently listed. Once these reviewers reach consensus, this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! See this document for info about what commands tagged team members can give me. |
Ping @BurntSushi, waiting on your ticky box here! |
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
1 similar comment
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
@bors: r+ |
📌 Commit e0f58c6 has been approved by |
Remove `T: Sized` on `ptr::is_null()` Originally from #44932 -- this is purely a revert of the last commit of that PR, which was removing some changes from the previous commits in the PR. So a revert of a revert means this is code written by @cuviper! @mikeyhew makes a compelling case in rust-lang/rfcs#433 (comment) for why this is the right way to implement `is_null` for trait objects. And the behavior for slices makes sense to me as well. ```diff impl<T: ?Sized> *const T { - pub fn is_null(self) -> bool where T: Sized; + pub fn is_null(self) -> bool; } impl<T: ?Sized> *mut T { - pub fn is_null(self) -> bool where T: Sized; + pub fn is_null(self) -> bool; }
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
This was already true, as we require rust-lang/rust#46094 to compile. This commit ensures that we test for this on CI so we know if this changes in the future.
Originally from #44932 -- this is purely a revert of the last commit of that PR, which was removing some changes from the previous commits in the PR. So a revert of a revert means this is code written by @cuviper!
@mikeyhew makes a compelling case in rust-lang/rfcs#433 (comment) for why this is the right way to implement
is_null
for trait objects. And the behavior for slices makes sense to me as well.