Don't drop blocks on foreign functions #4314
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
A code like
```rust
extern "C" {
fn f() {
fn g() {}
}
}
```
is incorrect and does not compile. Today rustfmt formats this in a way
that is correct:
```rust
extern "C" {
fn f();
}
```
But this loses information, and doesn't have to be done because we know
the content of the block if it is present. During development I don't
think rustfmt should drop the block in this context.
Closes rust-lang#4313
|
My assumption is that this was an unintentional side effect vs. rustfmt deliberately attempting to convert the input to compilable code so I'm a 👍 on this change but will defer to @topecongiro given the nature of the change. This may also be something we'd want to sneak into the 2.0 release given the "change" in formatting. |
topecongiro
approved these changes
Jul 14, 2020
This was referenced Nov 29, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A code like
is incorrect and does not compile. Today rustfmt formats this in a way
that is correct:
But this loses information, and doesn't have to be done because we know
the content of the block if it is present. During development I don't
think rustfmt should drop the block in this context.
Closes #4313