-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
Remove special-cased stable hashing for HIR module #92259
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ | ||
// revisions: rpass1 rpass2 | ||
// compile-flags: -Z incremental-ignore-spans -Z query-dep-graph | ||
|
||
// Tests that module hashing depends on the order of the items | ||
// (since the order is exposed through `Mod.item_ids`). | ||
// Changing the order of items (while keeping `Span`s the same) | ||
// should still result in `hir_owner` being invalidated. | ||
// Note that it's possible to keep the spans unchanged using | ||
// a proc-macro (e.g. producing the module via `quote!`) | ||
// but we use `-Z incremental-ignore-spans` for simplicity | ||
|
||
#![feature(rustc_attrs)] | ||
|
||
#[cfg(rpass1)] | ||
#[rustc_clean(cfg="rpass1",except="hir_owner")] | ||
mod foo { | ||
struct First; | ||
struct Second; | ||
} | ||
|
||
#[cfg(rpass2)] | ||
#[rustc_clean(cfg="rpass2",except="hir_owner")] | ||
mod foo { | ||
struct Second; | ||
struct First; | ||
} | ||
|
||
fn main() {} |
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.
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.
combine_commutative
can be removed, since it isn't used anywhere else.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.
I thought that it might be used again in the future, so I kept it. cc @michaelwoerister
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.
Yes, let's keep it please. I might have a concrete use for it soon.
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.
For similar use case that ignores order of combined fingerprints? In that case we should fix the implementation instead of leaving it broken: when used as here it doesn't completely ignore the order when combining more than two fingerprints.
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.
Opened to #92528 to remove unintentional swap of lower and upper part of the result.