Remove private_in_public lint. #119
Closed
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
The nightly CI test "cargo +nightly udeps --workspace" failed with:
lint `private_in_public` has been removed: replaced with another
group of lints, see RFC
<https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2145-type-privacy.html> for more
information
But the replacement lints are not available with rustc 1.60.0 so just
remove private_in_public for now.
Signed-off-by: Edmund Grimley Evans <[email protected]>
|
I like the alternative better :) |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The nightly CI test "cargo +nightly udeps --workspace" failed with:
lint
private_in_publichas been removed: replaced with anothergroup of lints, see RFC
https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2145-type-privacy.html for more
information
But the replacement lints are not available with rustc 1.60.0 so just remove private_in_public for now.
BUT WAIT, DON'T MERGE THIS YET, because there's perhaps an alternative to consider; I think you can tell it to ignore unrecognised lints, which might be a better solution. Here's the alternative: #120