rustfmt: add test for field representing type builtin syntax#153229
Merged
rust-bors[bot] merged 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom Mar 1, 2026
Merged
rustfmt: add test for field representing type builtin syntax#153229rust-bors[bot] merged 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom
rust-bors[bot] merged 1 commit intorust-lang:mainfrom
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Some changes occurred in src/tools/rustfmt cc @rust-lang/rustfmt |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Collaborator
|
rustbot has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum. Use Why was this reviewer chosen?The reviewer was selected based on:
|
Member
|
r? ytmimi |
48 tasks
Contributor
|
@bors r+ rollup |
Contributor
rust-bors
bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 1, 2026
rustfmt: add test for field representing type builtin syntax As requested by @ytmimi in rust-lang#152730 (comment). Not sure if you want/need a more complex example. Just let me know.
This was referenced Mar 1, 2026
rust-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 1, 2026
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - #152042 (Suggest async block instead of async closure when possible) - #152949 (Introduce --ci flag in tidy) - #152655 (Disable debug_assert_not_in_new_nodes for multiple threads) - #153209 (Clean up `QueryVTable::hash_result` into `hash_value_fn`) - #153229 (rustfmt: add test for field representing type builtin syntax)
rust-bors bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 1, 2026
Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - #152042 (Suggest async block instead of async closure when possible) - #152949 (Introduce --ci flag in tidy) - #152655 (Disable debug_assert_not_in_new_nodes for multiple threads) - #153209 (Clean up `QueryVTable::hash_result` into `hash_value_fn`) - #153229 (rustfmt: add test for field representing type builtin syntax)
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 1, 2026
Rollup merge of #153229 - BennoLossin:frt-fmt, r=ytmimi rustfmt: add test for field representing type builtin syntax As requested by @ytmimi in #152730 (comment). Not sure if you want/need a more complex example. Just let me know.
jhpratt
added a commit
to jhpratt/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2026
…tfmt, r=ytmimi Roll rustfmt reviewers for in-tree rustfmt Noticed in rust-lang#153229 (comment), where because `src/tools/rustfmt` has no corresponding `[assign.owners]` entry, it rolls one of the `fallback` reviewers (Mark and me) which is needless indirection, since if it rolls to Mark, Mark will have to reroll again. This _can_ also be ```toml "/src/tools/rustfmt" = ["rustfmt", "rustfmt-contributors"] ``` which corresponds to https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt and https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt-contributors respectively. I will double-check with triagebot team if we can use review rotation toggles for `rust-lang/rust` in-tree `rustfmt` specifically. Discussion: [#t-rustfmt > review queue tracking for rust-lang/rust in-tree rustfmt](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/357797-t-rustfmt/topic/review.20queue.20tracking.20for.20rust-lang.2Frust.20in-tree.20rustfmt/with/576498516) ### Unresolved question - ~~Do we want to start everyone off as off-rotation? Or on-rotation? I plan to start conservatively by preserving existing effective status, which is everyone off-rotation.~~ We will match existing defaults, with everyone starting off as off-team-rotation. r? @ytmimi
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2026
…tfmt, r=ytmimi Roll rustfmt reviewers for in-tree rustfmt Noticed in rust-lang#153229 (comment), where because `src/tools/rustfmt` has no corresponding `[assign.owners]` entry, it rolls one of the `fallback` reviewers (Mark and me) which is needless indirection, since if it rolls to Mark, Mark will have to reroll again. This _can_ also be ```toml "/src/tools/rustfmt" = ["rustfmt", "rustfmt-contributors"] ``` which corresponds to https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt and https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt-contributors respectively. I will double-check with triagebot team if we can use review rotation toggles for `rust-lang/rust` in-tree `rustfmt` specifically. Discussion: [#t-rustfmt > review queue tracking for rust-lang/rust in-tree rustfmt](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/357797-t-rustfmt/topic/review.20queue.20tracking.20for.20rust-lang.2Frust.20in-tree.20rustfmt/with/576498516) ### Unresolved question - ~~Do we want to start everyone off as off-rotation? Or on-rotation? I plan to start conservatively by preserving existing effective status, which is everyone off-rotation.~~ We will match existing defaults, with everyone starting off as off-team-rotation. r? @ytmimi
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2026
…tfmt, r=ytmimi Roll rustfmt reviewers for in-tree rustfmt Noticed in rust-lang#153229 (comment), where because `src/tools/rustfmt` has no corresponding `[assign.owners]` entry, it rolls one of the `fallback` reviewers (Mark and me) which is needless indirection, since if it rolls to Mark, Mark will have to reroll again. This _can_ also be ```toml "/src/tools/rustfmt" = ["rustfmt", "rustfmt-contributors"] ``` which corresponds to https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt and https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt-contributors respectively. I will double-check with triagebot team if we can use review rotation toggles for `rust-lang/rust` in-tree `rustfmt` specifically. Discussion: [#t-rustfmt > review queue tracking for rust-lang/rust in-tree rustfmt](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/357797-t-rustfmt/topic/review.20queue.20tracking.20for.20rust-lang.2Frust.20in-tree.20rustfmt/with/576498516) ### Unresolved question - ~~Do we want to start everyone off as off-rotation? Or on-rotation? I plan to start conservatively by preserving existing effective status, which is everyone off-rotation.~~ We will match existing defaults, with everyone starting off as off-team-rotation. r? @ytmimi
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2026
…tfmt, r=ytmimi Roll rustfmt reviewers for in-tree rustfmt Noticed in rust-lang#153229 (comment), where because `src/tools/rustfmt` has no corresponding `[assign.owners]` entry, it rolls one of the `fallback` reviewers (Mark and me) which is needless indirection, since if it rolls to Mark, Mark will have to reroll again. This _can_ also be ```toml "/src/tools/rustfmt" = ["rustfmt", "rustfmt-contributors"] ``` which corresponds to https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt and https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt-contributors respectively. I will double-check with triagebot team if we can use review rotation toggles for `rust-lang/rust` in-tree `rustfmt` specifically. Discussion: [#t-rustfmt > review queue tracking for rust-lang/rust in-tree rustfmt](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/357797-t-rustfmt/topic/review.20queue.20tracking.20for.20rust-lang.2Frust.20in-tree.20rustfmt/with/576498516) ### Unresolved question - ~~Do we want to start everyone off as off-rotation? Or on-rotation? I plan to start conservatively by preserving existing effective status, which is everyone off-rotation.~~ We will match existing defaults, with everyone starting off as off-team-rotation. r? @ytmimi
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2026
Rollup merge of #153230 - jieyouxu:rustfmt-reviewers-for-rustfmt, r=ytmimi Roll rustfmt reviewers for in-tree rustfmt Noticed in #153229 (comment), where because `src/tools/rustfmt` has no corresponding `[assign.owners]` entry, it rolls one of the `fallback` reviewers (Mark and me) which is needless indirection, since if it rolls to Mark, Mark will have to reroll again. This _can_ also be ```toml "/src/tools/rustfmt" = ["rustfmt", "rustfmt-contributors"] ``` which corresponds to https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt and https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/rustfmt-contributors respectively. I will double-check with triagebot team if we can use review rotation toggles for `rust-lang/rust` in-tree `rustfmt` specifically. Discussion: [#t-rustfmt > review queue tracking for rust-lang/rust in-tree rustfmt](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/357797-t-rustfmt/topic/review.20queue.20tracking.20for.20rust-lang.2Frust.20in-tree.20rustfmt/with/576498516) ### Unresolved question - ~~Do we want to start everyone off as off-rotation? Or on-rotation? I plan to start conservatively by preserving existing effective status, which is everyone off-rotation.~~ We will match existing defaults, with everyone starting off as off-team-rotation. r? @ytmimi
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As requested by @ytmimi in #152730 (comment).
Not sure if you want/need a more complex example. Just let me know.