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

Implement RFC #1245 : unsafe const fn #28827

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 14, 2015

Conversation

thepowersgang
Copy link
Contributor

This is the original test implementation, which works according to the tests I wrote, but might need a review.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

r? @pnkfelix

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@thepowersgang
Copy link
Contributor Author

Feel free to hold off on this until the amendment is merged.

@thepowersgang
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just for reference (and linking the issues), this is an implementation of rust-lang/rfcs#1245

@Aatch
Copy link
Contributor

Aatch commented Oct 13, 2015

@bors r+ 4c88bf2

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 13, 2015

⌛ Testing commit 4c88bf2 with merge 8d2e3f5...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 13, 2015
This is the original test implementation, which works according to the tests I wrote, but might need a review.
@alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

@bors: retry force

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 14, 2015

⌛ Testing commit 4c88bf2 with merge 9ea0065...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 14, 2015

⛄ The build was interrupted to prioritize another pull request.

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Oct 14, 2015

⌛ Testing commit 4c88bf2 with merge a668dd2...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 14, 2015
This is the original test implementation, which works according to the tests I wrote, but might need a review.
@bors bors merged commit 4c88bf2 into rust-lang:master Oct 14, 2015
@phil-opp
Copy link
Contributor

What about the order? In rust-lang/rfcs#1245 the order was set to const unsafe fn (see aturon's comment). But this PR seems to implement unsafe const fn.

@thepowersgang
Copy link
Contributor Author

Huh... implements the RFC as merged, but yes, @aturon's comment did state the other ordering.

@brson
Copy link
Contributor

brson commented Oct 16, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants