Remove leftover of type ascription feature gating#111350
Conversation
fccb855 to
225ab7a
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: this removed the language feature gate, but the built-in macro creates a library feature gate of the same name, which doesn't conflict.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should the feature be declared in rustc_feature::removed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder how well that interacts with the library feature. Maybe we should just keep the feature, but you can try moving it to removed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we also didn't remove it from AST right now, there are multiple test case is changed to use type_ascribe!, maybe we should keep it at this moment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should the feature be declared in rustc_feature::removed?
|
Let's keep the feature definition, but the removal of the gating code looks good. |
c3e7dc1 to
8baa32f
Compare
|
@bors r=Nilstrieb |
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
|
Finished benchmarking commit (7d5b746): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)ResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
CyclesResultsThis is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 648.734s -> 647.604s (-0.17%) |
Fixes #111325
r? @Nilstrieb