Skip to content

Conversation

@Loirooriol
Copy link
Contributor

After #40639, this variant holds a single value, and I don't think think using named fields was providing much extra clarity.

Testing: not needed, no behavior change

After servo#40639, this variant holds a single value, and I don't think think
using named fields was providing much extra clarity.

Signed-off-by: Oriol Brufau <obrufau@igalia.com>
@Loirooriol Loirooriol requested a review from gterzian as a code owner November 24, 2025 22:08
@servo-highfive servo-highfive added the S-awaiting-review There is new code that needs to be reviewed. label Nov 24, 2025
@servo-highfive servo-highfive removed the S-awaiting-review There is new code that needs to be reviewed. label Nov 24, 2025
@TimvdLippe TimvdLippe enabled auto-merge November 24, 2025 22:22
@TimvdLippe TimvdLippe added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 24, 2025
@servo-highfive servo-highfive added the S-awaiting-merge The PR is in the process of compiling and running tests on the automated CI. label Nov 24, 2025
Merged via the queue into servo:main with commit 631edfe Nov 24, 2025
35 checks passed
@servo-highfive servo-highfive removed the S-awaiting-merge The PR is in the process of compiling and running tests on the automated CI. label Nov 24, 2025
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.

3 participants