Skip to content

lintcheck: key lints on line start rather than byte start/end #13250

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
Aug 11, 2024

Conversation

Alexendoo
Copy link
Member

Before: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/actions/runs/10305798317
After: https://github.com/Alexendoo/rust-clippy/actions/runs/10333749860

If a single lint emits e.g. twice on the same line and the messages change for both there would still be two changed entries

Also slightly changes the output, the URL is no longer visible

r? @xFrednet

changelog: none

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties label Aug 10, 2024
@xFrednet
Copy link
Member

LGTM! I love how good lintcheck has gotten recently. Thank you for the work! ❤️


Roses are red,
Roses are blue,
Roses are changes,
Roses are approved

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 11, 2024

📌 Commit 6de27a0 has been approved by xFrednet

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 11, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 6de27a0 with merge 94099f4...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Aug 11, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test
Approved by: xFrednet
Pushing 94099f4 to master...

@bors bors merged commit 94099f4 into rust-lang:master Aug 11, 2024
8 checks passed
@Alexendoo Alexendoo deleted the lintcheck-diff-key branch August 11, 2024 10:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants