-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.7k
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
rustdoc incorrectly evaluates and fails due to panic in zerocopy #122758
Comments
Filed rust-lang#122758 to track a proper fix, but this seems to solve the problem in the meantime and is probably OK in terms of impact on (internal) doc quality.
Mark-Simulacrum@eb7c254 works locally to resolve this bug, probably by just avoiding the relevant code path in rustdoc. |
Filed rust-lang#122758 to track a proper fix, but this seems to solve the problem in the meantime and is probably OK in terms of impact on (internal) doc quality.
This is strange. Tagging the compiler team as well. |
I've tried bisecting this error, but results are perhaps a bit iffy. Does any of these commit ring a bell? Regression in nightly-2023-07-19
|
This is hitting the 1.79 promotion too. Probably the fix in Mark-Simulacrum@eb7c254 wasn't quite enough -- that did land on master, so it's not entirely missing. |
This is a workaround for rust-lang#122758, but it's not clear why 1.79 requires a more extensive amount of no_inline than the previous release. Seems like there's something relatively subtle happening here.
With everything going on in rustc_codegen_gcc, didn't have time to take a look yet... |
This is a workaround for rust-lang#122758, but it's not clear why 1.79 requires a more extensive amount of no_inline than the previous release. Seems like there's something relatively subtle happening here.
This is a workaround for rust-lang#122758, but it's not clear why 1.79 requires a more extensive amount of no_inline than the previous release. Seems like there's something relatively subtle happening here.
This is a workaround for rust-lang#122758, but it's not clear why 1.79 requires a more extensive amount of no_inline than the previous release. Seems like there's something relatively subtle happening here.
…bertlarsan68 Bump bootstrap compiler to latest beta https://forge.rust-lang.org/release/process.html#master-bootstrap-update-t-2-day-tuesday This also cherry-picks d716d72 from the beta branching, to continue to workaround rust-lang#122758. r? bootstrap
Took a look at it and it seems normal. Can be reproduced with this
pub const YEP: bool = if !cfg!(doc) {
panic!("bad");
} else {
false
}; The problem is that the dependencies are built with rustc before being built with rustdoc (to get crate information). So unless |
This code:
with Cargo.toml:
produces the following error:
This seems to happen on all(?) of current stable (1.77), beta (1.78), and nightly (1.79, 3c85e56 2024-03-18) but I'm suspicious that there's some kind of new breakage here in 1.78, because this broke rust-lang/rust's CI on similar code (in rustc_data_structures): #122754 (comment) while performing a bump of the bootstrap compiler from 1.77 to 1.78. This minimal example appears to reproduce across all versions. Tagging this as a regression for now despite lacking a minimal reproducer demonstrating that.
I think this is likely a bug of some kind in rustdoc regardless, because presumably it's not intentional that we should fail to document (benign-looking) code like this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: