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

Rollup of 5 pull requests #124289

Merged
merged 12 commits into from
Apr 23, 2024
Merged

Rollup of 5 pull requests #124289

merged 12 commits into from
Apr 23, 2024

Conversation

matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

RalfJung and others added 12 commits March 26, 2024 08:11
panic_str only exists for the migration to 2021 panic macros

The only caller is `expect_failed`, which is already a cold inline(never) function, so inlining into that function should be fine. (And indeed `panic_str` was `#[inline]` anyway.)

The existence of panic_str risks someone calling it when they should call `panic` instead, and I can't see a reason why this footgun should exist.

I also extended the comment in `panic` to explain why it needs a `'static` string -- I know I've wondered about this in the past and it took me quite a while to understand.
weak lang items are not allowed to be #[track_caller]

For instance the panic handler will be called via this import
```rust
        extern "Rust" {
            #[lang = "panic_impl"]
            fn panic_impl(pi: &PanicInfo<'_>) -> !;
        }
```
A `#[track_caller]` would add an extra argument and thus make this the wrong signature.

The 2nd commit is a consistency rename; based on the docs [here](https://doc.rust-lang.org/unstable-book/language-features/lang-items.html) and [here](https://rustc-dev-guide.rust-lang.org/lang-items.html) I figured "lang item" is more widely used. (In the compiler output, "lang item" and "language item" seem to be pretty even.)
…s, r=davidtwco

Disallow ambiguous attributes on expressions

This implements the suggestion in [rust-lang#15701](rust-lang#15701 (comment)) to disallow ambiguous outer attributes on expressions. This should resolve one of the concerns blocking the stabilization of `stmt_expr_attributes`.
parser: remove unused(no reads) max_angle_bracket_count field

Isn't there (clippy) lint for variables with only writes? They should be marked as dead too, probably.
Found only https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#/collection_is_never_read
remove `push_trait_bound_inner`

Don't see a use for it.
@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Apr 23, 2024
@matthiaskrgr
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 23, 2024

📌 Commit 802f629 has been approved by matthiaskrgr

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Apr 23, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 23, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 802f629 with merge ad07aa1...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Apr 23, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: matthiaskrgr
Pushing ad07aa1 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Apr 23, 2024
@bors bors merged commit ad07aa1 into rust-lang:master Apr 23, 2024
13 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.79.0 milestone Apr 23, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Message Perf Build Sha
#123050 panic_str only exists for the migration to 2021 panic macros 8e67ba9aa5ac46cbb5326023e3f31025a5e04ecf (link)
#124067 weak lang items are not allowed to be #[track_caller] 364eaa9ce37aa451c351952941489fea3ab4a6a2 (link)
#124099 Disallow ambiguous attributes on expressions f6e8888d2b689371371b31bac87c5b13897e7806 (link)
#124284 parser: remove unused(no reads) max_angle_bracket_count fie… ee1a1ffcbb8e5d736df2cd59ee9f7c048feee3f6 (link)
#124288 remove push_trait_bound_inner d321d8343e695f74a0b973ca03f1cab33e637eec (link)

previous master: c67277301c

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@bors bors mentioned this pull request Apr 23, 2024
4 tasks
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (ad07aa1): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.3% [-0.3%, -0.2%] 7
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.2% [-0.2%, -0.2%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.3% [-0.3%, -0.2%] 7

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
3.7% [3.1%, 4.3%] 2
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 3.7% [3.1%, 4.3%] 2

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.2% [-0.2%, -0.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.2% [-0.2%, -0.2%] 1

Bootstrap: 673.928s -> 673.699s (-0.03%)
Artifact size: 316.08 MiB -> 316.17 MiB (0.03%)

@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr deleted the rollup-oxw52jy branch September 1, 2024 17:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants