[naga] Make Level::next() public.
#7349
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
kpreid
added a commit
to kpreid/wgpu
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 17, 2025
The `#![allow(dead_code)]` on the module was hiding dead code in the child modules. I changed it to be conditional on actually having no backends enabled. (Note that with gfx-rs#7349, there would actually be no warnings and we could remove the `allow(dead_code)` entirely, but I expect that state of affairs won’t necessarily persist.)
6 tasks
kpreid
added a commit
to kpreid/wgpu
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 17, 2025
The `#![allow(dead_code)]` on the module was hiding dead code in the child modules. I changed it to be conditional on actually having no backends enabled. (Note that with gfx-rs#7349, there would actually be no warnings and we could remove the `allow(dead_code)` entirely, but I expect that state of affairs won’t necessarily persist.)
kpreid
added a commit
to kpreid/wgpu
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 17, 2025
The `#![allow(dead_code)]` on the module was hiding dead code in the child modules. I changed it to be conditional on actually having no backends enabled. (Note that with gfx-rs#7349, there would actually be no warnings and we could remove the `allow(dead_code)` entirely, but I expect that state of affairs won’t necessarily persist.)
ErichDonGubler
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 17, 2025
The `#![allow(dead_code)]` on the module was hiding dead code in the child modules. I changed it to be conditional on actually having no backends enabled. (Note that with #7349, there would actually be no warnings and we could remove the `allow(dead_code)` entirely, but I expect that state of affairs won’t necessarily persist.)
cwfitzgerald
approved these changes
Mar 19, 2025
It doesn’t make sense to have `Level` public but not `Level::next()`.
kpreid
changed the title
Baked and Level::next() public.Level::next() public.
|
Thanks! |
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.
Description
Makes
naga::back::Level::next()pub. It doesn’t make sense to haveLevelpublic but notLevel::next().I met this problem while trying to make an out-of-tree backend:
Testing
Still builds
Squash or Rebase?
Rebase
Checklist
cargo fmt.taplo format.cargo clippy. If applicable, add:--target wasm32-unknown-unknowncargo xtask testto run tests.CHANGELOG.mdentry.