Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check #149517

WaffleLapkin · 2025-12-01T17:44:30Z

rustbot · 2025-12-01T17:44:33Z

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

src/tools/tidy/src/alphabetical.rs

jdonszelmann

haven't quite reviewed the entire algorithm, but at the least I would like to see something like ui tets / snapshot tests that take the unsorted input and checks that the sorted output after blessing is correct. At least some code actually running tidy --bless sorting some strings

View changes since this review

jdonszelmann · 2025-12-03T14:58:26Z

@bors r+ rollup

bors · 2025-12-03T14:58:29Z

📌 Commit 8b6431d has been approved by jdonszelmann

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…jdonszelmann Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check r? `@jdonszelmann`

Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - #147841 (Fix ICE when applying test macro to crate root) - #149501 (CTFE: avoid emitting a hard error on generic normalization failures) - #149517 (Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check) - #149521 (Improve `io::Error::downcast`) - #149545 (fix the check for which expressions read never type) - #149549 (Regression test for system register `ttbr0_el2`) - #149579 (Motor OS: fix compile error) - #149595 (Tidying up `tests/ui/issues` tests [2/N]) - #149597 (Revert "implement and test `Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}`") r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

This slightly changes alphabetical lint semantics... specifically if an "item" is multiline (when the next line does not have the same indentation) we now consider all lines (ignoring starting whitespace) for ordering, not just the first one.

Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - #147841 (Fix ICE when applying test macro to crate root) - #149501 (CTFE: avoid emitting a hard error on generic normalization failures) - #149517 (Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check) - #149521 (Improve `io::Error::downcast`) - #149545 (fix the check for which expressions read never type) - #149549 (Regression test for system register `ttbr0_el2`) - #149579 (Motor OS: fix compile error) - #149595 (Tidying up `tests/ui/issues` tests [2/N]) - #149597 (Revert "implement and test `Iterator::{exactly_one, collect_array}`") r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

Zalathar · 2025-12-04T05:23:41Z

Failed in rollup: #149603 (comment)

@bors r-

rustbot · 2025-12-07T12:57:28Z

This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

WaffleLapkin · 2025-12-07T13:03:45Z

@bors try jobs=aarch64-msvc-1

Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check try-job: aarch64-msvc-1

rust-bors · 2025-12-07T15:09:45Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: 78a4369 (78a436972e828092154dac042faaab2b30bf2327, parent: 1c5a0cfc13559b863b47b64b51429360fe55ef73)

WaffleLapkin · 2025-12-07T15:12:45Z

@bors r=jdonszelmann

bors · 2025-12-07T15:12:47Z

📌 Commit 3bbd6ea has been approved by jdonszelmann

It is now in the queue for this repository.

bors · 2025-12-07T20:08:37Z

⌛ Testing commit 3bbd6ea with merge ba2142a...

bors · 2025-12-07T23:22:57Z

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: jdonszelmann
Pushing ba2142a to main...

github-actions · 2025-12-07T23:26:05Z

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing fa1f706 (parent) -> ba2142a (this PR)

Test differences

Show 5 test diffs

Stage 0

alphabetical::tests::bless_funny_numbers: [missing] -> pass (J0)
alphabetical::tests::bless_multiline: [missing] -> pass (J0)
alphabetical::tests::bless_smoke: [missing] -> pass (J0)
alphabetical::tests::multiline: [missing] -> pass (J0)

Additionally, 1 doctest diff were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Job group index

J0: aarch64-apple, aarch64-gnu, aarch64-gnu-llvm-20-1, aarch64-msvc-1, i686-gnu-1, i686-gnu-nopt-1, i686-msvc-1, tidy, x86_64-gnu, x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-2, x86_64-gnu-llvm-20-3, x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-2, x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-3, x86_64-gnu-nopt, x86_64-gnu-stable, x86_64-mingw-1, x86_64-msvc-1

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard ba2142a19c1acabe770433418fa395b8a0ef47a4 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

aarch64-apple: 7065.9s -> 10665.6s (+50.9%)
i686-gnu-1: 7058.4s -> 8374.6s (+18.6%)
x86_64-rust-for-linux: 2540.5s -> 3004.1s (+18.2%)
dist-aarch64-apple: 7552.3s -> 6324.6s (-16.3%)
pr-check-1: 1689.0s -> 1942.8s (+15.0%)
test-various: 6042.8s -> 6926.3s (+14.6%)
x86_64-gnu-llvm-21-1: 3173.2s -> 3597.7s (+13.4%)
x86_64-mingw-1: 9664.9s -> 10793.5s (+11.7%)
pr-check-2: 2290.2s -> 2551.9s (+11.4%)
x86_64-gnu-llvm-20: 2424.5s -> 2696.3s (+11.2%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

rust-timer · 2025-12-08T00:44:46Z

Finished benchmarking commit (ba2142a): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 7.6%, secondary 2.1%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	7.6%	[7.6%, 7.6%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.1%	[2.1%, 2.1%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	7.6%	[7.6%, 7.6%]	1

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 468.293s -> 470.113s (0.39%)
Artifact size: 389.00 MiB -> 388.98 MiB (-0.00%)

rustbot assigned jdonszelmann Dec 1, 2025

WaffleLapkin force-pushed the alphabet-blessing branch from 4edf265 to dcc785d Compare December 2, 2025 10:14

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

jdonszelmann reviewed Dec 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/tools/tidy/src/alphabetical.rs Show resolved Hide resolved

jdonszelmann requested changes Dec 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Dec 3, 2025

WaffleLapkin force-pushed the alphabet-blessing branch from b9f3274 to 8b6431d Compare December 3, 2025 14:54

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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Dec 3, 2025

matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 3, 2025

Rollup merge of rust-lang#149517 - WaffleLapkin:alphabet-blessing, r=…

c0060ee

…jdonszelmann Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check r? `@jdonszelmann`

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 3, 2025

Rollup of 9 pull requests #149603

Closed

WaffleLapkin added 6 commits December 3, 2025 20:57

add a tidy test

00f3a35

refactor tidy alphabetical lint

cdc977d

This slightly changes alphabetical lint semantics... specifically if an "item" is multiline (when the next line does not have the same indentation) we now consider all lines (ignoring starting whitespace) for ordering, not just the first one.

implement tidy bless for alphabetical blocks

4e9c504

bless tidy tests

53f6440

drive-by: tidy: fixup style

d318d3d

bless tidy

ed1b831

bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Dec 4, 2025

WaffleLapkin force-pushed the alphabet-blessing branch from 8b6431d to 34b2293 Compare December 7, 2025 12:57

WaffleLapkin added 2 commits December 7, 2025 13:58

add tests for tidy alphabetical blessing

87f9ea2

attempt to fix tidyselftest on windows

3bbd6ea

WaffleLapkin force-pushed the alphabet-blessing branch from 34b2293 to 3bbd6ea Compare December 7, 2025 13:02

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 7, 2025

Auto merge of #149517 - WaffleLapkin:alphabet-blessing, r=<try>

78a4369

Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check try-job: aarch64-msvc-1

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-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Dec 7, 2025

bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 7, 2025

bors merged commit ba2142a into rust-lang:main Dec 7, 2025
13 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.94.0 milestone Dec 7, 2025

WaffleLapkin deleted the alphabet-blessing branch December 8, 2025 10:18

Uh oh!

Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check #149517

Implement blessing for tidy alphabetical check #149517

Uh oh!

Conversation

WaffleLapkin commented Dec 1, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Dec 1, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

Uh oh!

jdonszelmann left a comment • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jdonszelmann commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

Zalathar commented Dec 4, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

WaffleLapkin commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

WaffleLapkin commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 7, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Dec 7, 2025

Test differences

Stage 0

Job duration changes

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Dec 8, 2025

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Instruction count

Max RSS (memory usage)

Cycles

Binary size

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

jdonszelmann left a comment •

edited by rustbot

Loading