Skip to content

Add E0510, E0511 and E0512 error explanations #28909

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 14, 2015
Merged

Add E0510, E0511 and E0512 error explanations #28909

merged 3 commits into from
Oct 14, 2015

Conversation

GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez changed the title Add E0512 error explanation Add E0510 and E0512 error explanations Oct 8, 2015
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks to @oli-obk for his great help on E0510 !

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 8, 2015

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #28897) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

Updated ! Review needed.

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

r? @steveklabnik
cc @gankro

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez changed the title Add E0510 and E0512 error explanations Add E0510, E0511 and E0512 error explanations Oct 9, 2015
nagisa
nagisa reviewed Oct 10, 2015
View reviewed changes
src/librustc_trans/diagnostics.rs
"##,

E0511: r##"
An invalid monomorphization on an intrinsic function was used.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

“An intrinsic was monomorphized invalidly.” or “Invalid monomorphization of an intrinsic was used” maybe? You can’t “use” monomorphization “on” something.

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez mentioned this pull request Oct 11, 2015
Merged
pnkfelix
pnkfelix reviewed Oct 13, 2015
View reviewed changes
src/librustc_trans/diagnostics.rs
```

Return values may be stored in a return register(s) or written into a so-called
out pointer. In case the returned value is big enough (this is
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

"value is big enough [...] to not fit into ..." is awkward phrasing at best.

I would instead say "value is too big [...] to fit into ..."

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was wondering if " may be stored in a return register(s)" was correct too. Is it ?

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

(r=me after applying adjustments suggested above.)

apasel422
apasel422 reviewed Oct 13, 2015
View reviewed changes
src/librustc_trans/diagnostics.rs

Return values may be stored in a return register(s) or written into a so-called
out pointer. In case the returned value is too big (this is
target-ABI-dependent and generally not portable or future proof) to not fit
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

s/to not fit/to fit/

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

Updated !

@pnkfelix
Copy link
Member

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 14, 2015

📌 Commit 4618aad has been approved by pnkfelix

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 14, 2015

⌛ Testing commit 4618aad with merge b28a550...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 14, 2015
@bors
Auto merge of #28909 - GuillaumeGomez:patch-3, r=pnkfelix
b28a550 
r? @Manishearth
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 14, 2015

☀️ Test successful - auto-linux-32-nopt-t, auto-linux-32-opt, auto-linux-64-nopt-t, auto-linux-64-opt, auto-linux-64-x-android-t, auto-mac-32-opt, auto-mac-64-nopt-t, auto-mac-64-opt, auto-win-gnu-32-nopt-t, auto-win-gnu-32-opt, auto-win-gnu-64-nopt-t, auto-win-gnu-64-opt, auto-win-msvc-32-opt, auto-win-msvc-64-opt

@bors bors merged commit 4618aad into rust-lang:master Oct 14, 2015
@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez deleted the patch-3 branch October 14, 2015 15:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@steveklabnik steveklabnik

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@GuillaumeGomez @bors @pnkfelix @nagisa @apasel422 @steveklabnik @Manishearth