Skip to content

Improve wording for external crate resolution error #77379

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

Merged

Conversation

camelid
Copy link
Member

@camelid camelid commented Sep 30, 2020

I think it reads better this way.

I think it reads better this way.
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @davidtwco

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

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Sep 30, 2020
@camelid camelid added A-diagnostics Area: Messages for errors, warnings, and lints A-resolve Area: Name/path resolution done by `rustc_resolve` specifically labels Sep 30, 2020
Copy link
Member

@davidtwco davidtwco left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, r=me when CI passes

@@ -1157,7 +1157,7 @@ impl<'a, 'b> ImportResolver<'a, 'b> {
}
_ => {
if !ident.is_path_segment_keyword() {
format!("no `{}` external crate", ident)
format!("no external crate `{}`", ident)
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 considered changing it to "no external crate named", but I didn't want to be wordy. What do you think?

Suggested change
format!("no external crate `{}`", ident)
format!("no external crate named `{}`", ident)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think that the PR's current wording is fine, but I don't feel strongly - either is an improvement.

@camelid
Copy link
Member Author

camelid commented Sep 30, 2020

@bors r=davidtwco

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 30, 2020

@camelid: 🔑 Insufficient privileges: Not in reviewers

@camelid
Copy link
Member Author

camelid commented Sep 30, 2020

Oh well, worth a try :)

@jyn514
Copy link
Member

jyn514 commented Oct 1, 2020

@bors r=davidtwco rollup

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 1, 2020

📌 Commit 2c5e2a6 has been approved by davidtwco

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Oct 1, 2020
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 1, 2020

⌛ Testing commit 2c5e2a6 with merge 3bbc443...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Oct 1, 2020

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions, checks-azure
Approved by: davidtwco
Pushing 3bbc443 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Oct 1, 2020
@bors bors merged commit 3bbc443 into rust-lang:master Oct 1, 2020
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.48.0 milestone Oct 1, 2020
@camelid camelid deleted the improve-wording-crate-resolution-error branch October 1, 2020 17:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-diagnostics Area: Messages for errors, warnings, and lints A-resolve Area: Name/path resolution done by `rustc_resolve` specifically merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants