-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
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
refactor: Use more serde_untagged #12581
Conversation
I felt this does a good job of cleaning up the code and by using it more, new uses are more likely to use it. Due to an error reporting limitation in `serde_untagged`, I'm not using this for some `MaybeWorkspace` types because it makes the errors worse. I also held off on some config visitors because they seemed more complicated and I didn't want to risk that code.
r? @ehuss (rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
a27b68b
to
ad91a29
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks pretty good!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me!
@bors r+ |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Update cargo 21 commits in 96fe1c9e1aecd8f57063e3753969bb6418fd2fd5..d14c85f4e6e7671673b1a1bc87231ff7164761e1 2023-08-29 20:10:34 +0000 to 2023-09-05 22:28:10 +0000 - fix(resolver): Make resolver behavior independent of package order (rust-lang/cargo#12602) - cargo-credential: change serialization of cache expiration (rust-lang/cargo#12622) - Update registry-web-api.md yank/unyank comments (rust-lang/cargo#12619) - test: new options of debuginfo are no longer unstable (rust-lang/cargo#12618) - use split_once for cleaner code (rust-lang/cargo#12615) - stop using lazy_static (rust-lang/cargo#12616) - doc: adjust all doc headings one level up (rust-lang/cargo#12595) - chore(deps): update compatible (rust-lang/cargo#12609) - chore(deps): update rust crate cargo_metadata to 0.17.0 (rust-lang/cargo#12610) - Prepare for partial-version package specs (rust-lang/cargo#12591) - refactor: Use more serde_untagged (rust-lang/cargo#12581) - fix(cli): Help users know possible `--target` values (rust-lang/cargo#12607) - Tab completion for --target uses rustup but fallsback to rustc (rust-lang/cargo#12606) - Fewer temporary needless strings (rust-lang/cargo#12604) - fix(help): Provide better commands heading for styling (rust-lang/cargo#12593) - fix(update): Clarify meaning of --aggressive as --recursive (rust-lang/cargo#12544) - docs(changelog): Clarify language for Cargo.lock policy (rust-lang/cargo#12601) - fix typo: "default branch branch" -> "default branch" (rust-lang/cargo#12598) - fix: add error for unsupported credential provider version (rust-lang/cargo#12590) - fix(help): Explain --explain (rust-lang/cargo#12592) - fix(help): Remove redundant information from new/init (rust-lang/cargo#12594) r? ghost
This was broken in rust-lang#12581
Errors like this aren't too helpful ``` error: stderr did not match: 1 1 error: failed to parse manifest at `[..]`2 2 3 3 Caused by:4 4 TOML parse error at line 3, column 275 5 |6 6 3 | version = 17 7 | ^8 - invalid type: integer `1`, expected SemVer version 8 + invalid type: integer `1`, expected a string or workspace ``` This was broken in rust-lang#12581
fix(test): Add back in newlines to diffs Errors like this aren't too helpful ``` error: stderr did not match: 1 1 error: failed to parse manifest at `[..]`2 2 3 3 Caused by:4 4 TOML parse error at line 3, column 275 5 |6 6 3 | version = 17 7 | ^8 - invalid type: integer `1`, expected SemVer version 8 + invalid type: integer `1`, expected a string or workspace ``` This was broken in #12581
What does this PR try to resolve?
This is a follow up to #12574 that replaces hand-implemented Visitors with
serde_untagged
because I felt it is cleaner codeDue to an error reporting limitation in
serde_untagged
, I'm not usingthis for some
MaybeWorkspace
types because it makes the errors worse. See dtolnay/serde-untagged#2I also held off on some config visitors because they seemed more
complicated and I didn't want to risk that code.
How should we test and review this PR?
The main caveat is we might not have tests for every single error case.
Additional information