user0/rust
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Rollup merge of #110259 - ndrewxie:issue-109964-fix-gitstuff, r=cjgillot

Browse source 
Added diagnostic for pin! macro in addition to Box::pin if Unpin isn't implemented

I made a PR earlier, but accidentally renamed a branch and that deleted the PR... sorry for the duplicate

Currently, if an operation on `Pin<T>` is performed that requires `T` to implement `Unpin`, the diagnostic suggestion is to use `Box::pin` ("note: consider using `Box::pin`").

This PR suggests pin! as well, as that's another valid way of pinning a value, and avoids a heap allocation. Appropriate diagnostic suggestions were included to highlight the difference in semantics (local pinning for pin! vs non-local for Box::pin).

Fixes #109964
This commit is contained in:
Matthias Krüger 2023-04-13 21:58:37 +02:00 • committed by GitHub
commit e413c2e770
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
8 changed files with 55 additions and 7 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
library/core/src/marker.rs
View file

@ -823,7 +823,7 @@ unsafe impl<T: ?Sized> Freeze for &mut T {}
/// [`pin` module]: crate::pin
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
#[rustc_on_unimplemented(
note = "consider using `Box::pin`",
note = "consider using the `pin!` macro\nconsider using `Box::pin` if you need to access the pinned value outside of the current scope",
message = "`{Self}` cannot be unpinned"
)]
#[lang = "unpin"]