-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13k
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
Two lexer tweaks #36921
Two lexer tweaks #36921
Conversation
First, assert! is redundant w.r.t. the unwrap() immediately afterwards. Second, `byte_offset_diff` is effectively computed as `current_byte_offset + ch.len_utf8() - current_byte_offset` (with `next` as an intermediate) which is silly and can be simplified.
r? @nrc (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
The two branches of this `if` compute the same value. This commit gets rid of the first branch, which makes this calculation identical to the one in scan_block_comment().
efbed79
to
9e3dcb4
Compare
This seems good to me. |
#36470 has been r+'ed now, so I think this PR can be closed (it will have to go through the slightly longer syntax-breaking-change landing process though). We could land this PR directly since it does not change any API, but that would mean rebasing #36470. @nnethercote do you have a preference? |
@bors: r+ |
📌 Commit 9e3dcb4 has been approved by |
Two lexer tweaks 19 days later, I haven't received a review of my commits in rust-lang#36470. In an attempt to make some progress, I'm going to split up the changes. Here are the ones that don't relate to renaming things.
19 days later, I haven't received a review of my commits in #36470. In an attempt to make some progress, I'm going to split up the changes. Here are the ones that don't relate to renaming things.