Skip to content

Constify ControlFlow methods without unstable bounds #148248

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 2 commits into from
Nov 10, 2025
Merged

Constify ControlFlow methods without unstable bounds #148248

merged 2 commits into from
Nov 10, 2025

Conversation

@nxsaken
Copy link
Contributor

@nxsaken nxsaken commented Oct 29, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Feature: min_const_control_flow
Tracking issue: #148738

This PR constifies some of the methods on ControlFlow.

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Oct 29, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Oct 29, 2025

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

rustbot has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

workingjubilee commented Oct 29, 2025

Note that some of the constifications touch #143874 -- let me know if I should split off the ones that don't.

Yes.

@nxsaken nxsaken force-pushed the const_control_flow branch from a706598 to c4f6f7a Compare October 30, 2025 10:01
@nxsaken nxsaken changed the title Constify ControlFlow methods Constify ControlFlow methods without unstable bounds Oct 30, 2025
@nxsaken
Copy link
Contributor Author

nxsaken commented Oct 30, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Moved the const_trait_impl related const–ns to a separate PR: #148285. Should I give them separate feature flags and create tracking issues for each?

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Mark-Simulacrum commented Nov 8, 2025

I think we usually have a tracking issue for this? Let's cut one, add it to the const unstable declarations, and then r=me on this.

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Nov 8, 2025
@nxsaken nxsaken mentioned this pull request Nov 9, 2025
Open
3 tasks
@nxsaken
Copy link
Contributor Author

nxsaken commented Nov 9, 2025

@Mark-Simulacrum done. I created separate issues for each PR to avoid headache with partial stabilization.

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

Mark-Simulacrum commented Nov 9, 2025

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Nov 9, 2025

📌 Commit d05133f has been approved by Mark-Simulacrum

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Nov 9, 2025
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Nov 9, 2025
Merged
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 9, 2025
@bors
Auto merge of #148762 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-4oifvkr, r=matthiaskrgr
8401398 
Rollup of 4 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - #148248 (Constify `ControlFlow` methods without unstable bounds)
 - #148285 (Constify `ControlFlow` methods with unstable bounds)
 - #148510 (compiletest: Do the known-directives check only once, and improve its error message)
 - #148655 (Fix invalid macro tag generation for keywords which can be followed by values)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 5598d53 into rust-lang:master Nov 10, 2025
11 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.93.0 milestone Nov 10, 2025
rust-timer added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2025
@rust-timer
Unrolled build for #148248
e3f3d2e 
Rollup merge of #148248 - nxsaken:const_control_flow, r=Mark-Simulacrum

Constify `ControlFlow` methods without unstable bounds

Feature: `min_const_control_flow`
Tracking issue: #148738

This PR constifies some of the methods on `ControlFlow`.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum

Labels

S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

1.93.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@nxsaken @rustbot @workingjubilee @Mark-Simulacrum @bors