Skip to content

Fix usage of <float> in docs #9800

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
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 11, 2013
Merged

Fix usage of <float> in docs #9800

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 11, 2013

Conversation

vmx
Copy link
Contributor

@vmx vmx commented Oct 10, 2013

The example for std::rand::random was still
using , which got removed from Rust.

The example for std::rand::random was still
using <float>, which got removed from Rust.
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2013
The example for std::rand::random was still
using <float>, which got removed from Rust.
@bors bors closed this Oct 11, 2013
@bors bors merged commit 82f53d6 into rust-lang:master Oct 11, 2013
flip1995 pushed a commit to flip1995/rust that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2022
Return multiple resolutions from `def_path_res`

Changes `def_path_res` to return all the resolutions matching the path rather than the first one (with a namespace hint that covered some cases).  This would fix any issues that come up with multiple versions of the same crate being present as they all have the same crate name

It also adds resolution of `impl _ {}` items for local items, and removes struct field resolution as it didn't seem to be used anywhere

I tested it on a local crate and it worked for the multiple crate issue, but I couldn't come up with a test that worked well with `// aux-build`, maybe `// aux-crate` after rust-lang#103266 could work but I'm not sure on that either

changelog: [`disallowed_methods`], [`disallowed_types`], [`disallowed_macros`]: fix path resolution with multiple versions of the same crate
changelog: [`disallowed_methods`]: Resolve methods in `impl`s in the current crate
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.

3 participants