Skip to content
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

Remove garbled doc comment for actix_router::IntoPattern::is_single #168

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jul 28, 2020
Merged

Remove garbled doc comment for actix_router::IntoPattern::is_single #168

merged 1 commit into from Jul 28, 2020

Conversation

mkantor
Copy link
Contributor

@mkantor mkantor commented Jul 27, 2020

PR Type

Other

PR Checklist

Check your PR fulfills the following:

  • Tests for the changes have been added / updated.
  • Documentation comments have been added / updated.
  • A changelog entry has been made for the appropriate packages.
  • Format code with the latest stable rustfmt

Overview

I noticed the doc comment for actix_router::IntoPattern::is_single was typo'd.

It was probably meant to be "Single pattern", but since the method seems self-documenting enough I just removed it. Please let me know if you'd prefer something else!

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 27, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #168 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #168   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   60.41%   60.41%           
=======================================
  Files          73       73           
  Lines        4785     4785           
=======================================
  Hits         2891     2891           
  Misses       1894     1894           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
router/src/lib.rs 51.85% <ø> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 8ace926...4cbb9ee. Read the comment docs.

@mkantor
Copy link
Contributor Author

mkantor commented Jul 28, 2020

The CI job for Windows-mingw failed because of this:

D:\a\actix-net\actix-net>d:\a\_temp\msys\\msys64\usr\bin\bash.exe -ilc "cd $OLDPWD && pacman --noconfirm -S base-devel pkg-config" 
bash: cannot set terminal process group (-1): Inappropriate ioctl for device
bash: no job control in this shell
error: mingw32: key "4A6129F4E4B84AE46ED7F635628F528CF3053E04" is unknown
error: key "4A6129F4E4B84AE46ED7F635628F528CF3053E04" could not be looked up remotely
error: mingw64: key "4A6129F4E4B84AE46ED7F635628F528CF3053E04" is unknown
error: key "4A6129F4E4B84AE46ED7F635628F528CF3053E04" could not be looked up remotely
error: msys: key "4A6129F4E4B84AE46ED7F635628F528CF3053E04" is unknown
error: key "4A6129F4E4B84AE46ED7F635628F528CF3053E04" could not be looked up remotely
error: database 'mingw32' is not valid (invalid or corrupted database (PGP signature))
error: database 'mingw64' is not valid (invalid or corrupted database (PGP signature))
error: database 'msys' is not valid (invalid or corrupted database (PGP signature))

Not sure if this is some ephemeral issue or if the CI environment is borked. I force-pushed an amended commit to re-trigger CI; we'll see if it succeeds this time.

Copy link
Member

@JohnTitor JohnTitor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd just ignore the failures on mingw as it's obviously unrelated and it's enough to test on other platforms in this case.

@JohnTitor JohnTitor merged commit 0c5f1da into actix:master Jul 28, 2020
@JohnTitor
Copy link
Member

Thanks!

@mkantor mkantor deleted the patch-1 branch July 29, 2020 02:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants