cli: introduce semantic exit code constants for rustup check #4700
Conversation
|
Hi @rami3l @ChrisDenton — quick check: is this the right approach, or should exit codes be handled differently? Also, do we want to replace all exit codes with named constants, or only the ones in the update/no-update path? Any advice would be appreciated. |
|
Yes, it should change all exit codes to use constants. |
rami3l
left a comment
rami3l
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM modulo #4700 (comment), many thanks!
PS: Please squash all commits into one when you are done so that we can merge it.
rami3l
left a comment
rami3l
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM modulo #4700 (comment), many thanks!
PS: Please squash all commits into one when you are done so that we can merge it.
dharmvr1
force-pushed
the
exit_code_constant
branch
2 times, most recently
from
49af512 to
1394af8
Compare
rami3l
left a comment
rami3l
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just change the commit message to be the same as the PR title please? "wip" is not very descriptive :]
wip complete add const name for exit_code change const type to ExitCode change const type to ExitCode change to Self adding const name for exit_code
dharmvr1
force-pushed
the
exit_code_constant
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1394af8 to
2f2e97a
Compare
3 participants
continuation to #4694