abi/compatibility test: remove tests inside repr(C) wrappers #130185
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
r? @nnethercote rustbot has assigned @nnethercote. Use |
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
|
r? compiler-errors @bors r+ |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
|
@bors rollup |
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 10, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#130143 (miri-test-libstd: add missing BOOTSTRAP_ARGS) - rust-lang#130173 (rustdoc: add two regression tests) - rust-lang#130175 (`rustc_mir_transform` cleanups 3) - rust-lang#130184 (coverage: Clean up terminology in counter creation) - rust-lang#130185 (abi/compatibility test: remove tests inside repr(C) wrappers) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
bors
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 10, 2024
…iaskrgr Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#130143 (miri-test-libstd: add missing BOOTSTRAP_ARGS) - rust-lang#130173 (rustdoc: add two regression tests) - rust-lang#130175 (`rustc_mir_transform` cleanups 3) - rust-lang#130184 (coverage: Clean up terminology in counter creation) - rust-lang#130185 (abi/compatibility test: remove tests inside repr(C) wrappers) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 10, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#130185 - RalfJung:abi-compat-repr-c-wrappers, r=compiler-errors abi/compatibility test: remove tests inside repr(C) wrappers When I wrote the test I assumed we'd guarantee ABI compatibility to be "structural" wrt `repr(C)` types, i.e. if two `repr(C)` types have all their fields be pairwise ABI-compatible then the types are ABI-compatible. That got removed from the ABI compatibility docs before they landed, though, so let's also remove it from this test.
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2024
…e, r=jieyouxu interpret: remove outdated FIXME The rule about `repr(C)` types with compatible fields got removed from the ABI compat docs before they landed, so this FIXME here is no longer correct. (So this is basically a follow-up to rust-lang#130185, doing some more cleanup around deciding not to guarantee ABI compatibility for structurally compatible `repr(C)` types.)
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2024
…e, r=jieyouxu interpret: remove outdated FIXME The rule about `repr(C)` types with compatible fields got removed from the ABI compat docs before they landed, so this FIXME here is no longer correct. (So this is basically a follow-up to rust-lang#130185, doing some more cleanup around deciding not to guarantee ABI compatibility for structurally compatible `repr(C)` types.)
GuillaumeGomez
added a commit
to GuillaumeGomez/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2024
…e, r=jieyouxu interpret: remove outdated FIXME The rule about `repr(C)` types with compatible fields got removed from the ABI compat docs before they landed, so this FIXME here is no longer correct. (So this is basically a follow-up to rust-lang#130185, doing some more cleanup around deciding not to guarantee ABI compatibility for structurally compatible `repr(C)` types.)
rust-timer
added a commit
to rust-lang-ci/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#130690 - RalfJung:interpret-abi-compat-fixme, r=jieyouxu interpret: remove outdated FIXME The rule about `repr(C)` types with compatible fields got removed from the ABI compat docs before they landed, so this FIXME here is no longer correct. (So this is basically a follow-up to rust-lang#130185, doing some more cleanup around deciding not to guarantee ABI compatibility for structurally compatible `repr(C)` types.)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When I wrote the test I assumed we'd guarantee ABI compatibility to be "structural" wrt
repr(C)types, i.e. if tworepr(C)types have all their fields be pairwise ABI-compatible then the types are ABI-compatible. That got removed from the ABI compatibility docs before they landed, though, so let's also remove it from this test.