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

Improve support of condition compilation checking #10566

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
May 6, 2022

Conversation

Urgau
Copy link
Member

@Urgau Urgau commented Apr 14, 2022

This PR is a series of improvements to the check-cfg implementation.

What does this PR try to resolve?

This PR resolve the concern expressed in #10486 (comment) that is:

  • Fixing the tests on Windows: e8aa51d
  • Merging all the -Z flags under -Zcheck-cfg: 969e282
  • Moving of all of the check-cfg tests into a separate module: c18b442
  • And removing of an unused parameter: 068bdf4

How should we test and review this PR?

This PR should be reviewed commit by commit and tested with the automated tests or examples.

Additional information

I decided to use a custom macro to make the test functional under Windows, the macro generate a contains line with the correct escaping depending on the platform (windows or not windows).

@rust-highfive
Copy link

r? @ehuss

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Apr 14, 2022
@Urgau Urgau force-pushed the check-cfg-improvements branch from 068bdf4 to 868da2a Compare April 14, 2022 13:33
Copy link
Contributor

@ehuss ehuss left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the follow up!

src/doc/src/reference/unstable.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/testsuite/check_cfg.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/testsuite/check_cfg.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@Urgau Urgau force-pushed the check-cfg-improvements branch from 868da2a to 94acc49 Compare May 3, 2022 21:09
@ehuss
Copy link
Contributor

ehuss commented May 6, 2022

Thanks!

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 6, 2022

📌 Commit 94acc49bd95edadb49436e0c69c41a6a85343e41 has been approved by ehuss

@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 May 6, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 6, 2022

🔒 Merge conflict

This pull request and the master branch diverged in a way that cannot be automatically merged. Please rebase on top of the latest master branch, and let the reviewer approve again.

How do I rebase?

Assuming self is your fork and upstream is this repository, you can resolve the conflict following these steps:

  1. git checkout check-cfg-improvements (switch to your branch)
  2. git fetch upstream master (retrieve the latest master)
  3. git rebase upstream/master -p (rebase on top of it)
  4. Follow the on-screen instruction to resolve conflicts (check git status if you got lost).
  5. git push self check-cfg-improvements --force-with-lease (update this PR)

You may also read Git Rebasing to Resolve Conflicts by Drew Blessing for a short tutorial.

Please avoid the "Resolve conflicts" button on GitHub. It uses git merge instead of git rebase which makes the PR commit history more difficult to read.

Sometimes step 4 will complete without asking for resolution. This is usually due to difference between how Cargo.lock conflict is handled during merge and rebase. This is normal, and you should still perform step 5 to update this PR.

Error message
Auto-merging tests/testsuite/main.rs
Auto-merging tests/testsuite/doc.rs
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in tests/testsuite/doc.rs
Auto-merging src/doc/src/reference/unstable.md
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: The marked PR is awaiting some action (such as code changes) from the PR author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels May 6, 2022
@Urgau Urgau force-pushed the check-cfg-improvements branch from 94acc49 to 6f2fae1 Compare May 6, 2022 20:43
@Urgau
Copy link
Member Author

Urgau commented May 6, 2022

Conflict fixed.

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: The marked PR is awaiting some action (such as code changes) from the PR author. labels May 6, 2022
@ehuss
Copy link
Contributor

ehuss commented May 6, 2022

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 6, 2022

📌 Commit 6f2fae1 has been approved by ehuss

@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 May 6, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 6, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 6f2fae1 with merge 6878c43...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 6, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: ehuss
Pushing 6878c43 to master...

@bors bors merged commit 6878c43 into rust-lang:master May 6, 2022
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 12, 2022
Update cargo

20 commits in a44758ac805600edbb6ba51e7e6fb81a6077c0cd..3f052d8eed98c6a24f8b332fb2e6e6249d12d8c1
2022-05-04 02:29:34 +0000 to 2022-05-12 15:19:04 +0000
- pre-stabilization documentation for workspace inheritance (rust-lang/cargo#10659)
- test: Make curr_dir work in/out of workspace (rust-lang/cargo#10658)
- Fix no_cross_doctests race condition. (rust-lang/cargo#10660)
- Fix typo (rust-lang/cargo#10657)
- feat(install): Support `foo@version` like cargo-add (rust-lang/cargo#10650)
- fix typos found by the `typos-cli` crate (rust-lang/cargo#10649)
- feat(yank): Support foo@version like cargo-add (rust-lang/cargo#10597)
- add `cargo-features` to unstable docs for workspace inheritance (rust-lang/cargo#10648)
- Use the traits added to the Rust 2021 Edition prelude (rust-lang/cargo#10646)
- Pass `--target` to `rustdoc` for `cargo test` if specified with host target. (rust-lang/cargo#10594)
- Fix use of .. in dep-info-basedir (rust-lang/cargo#10281)
- fix some typos (rust-lang/cargo#10639)
- Move snapshot tests into testsuite (rust-lang/cargo#10638)
- Improve support of condition compilation checking (rust-lang/cargo#10566)
- When documenting private items in a binary, ignore warnings about links to private items (rust-lang/cargo#10142)
- Extend pkgid syntax with ``@`` support (rust-lang/cargo#10582)
- move one `snapshot/add` test into `testsuite/cargo_add/` (rust-lang/cargo#10631)
- Add caveat for covering features (rust-lang/cargo#10605)
- Improve CARGO_ENCODED_RUSTFLAGS and CARGO_ENCODED_RUSTDOCFLAGS variables docs (rust-lang/cargo#10633)
- reorganize `snapshot` tests to better work in contexts that sort by extension (rust-lang/cargo#10629)
@ehuss ehuss added this to the 1.62.0 milestone May 20, 2022
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2022
…ehuss

Fix deserialization of check-cfg in config.toml

When improving the check-cfg implementation in #10566 I changed the internal representation of `check_cfg` from multiple `bool` options to one `Option<(bool, bool, bool, bool)>` but I didn't realize until rust-lang/rust#82450 (comment) that the internal representation is actually somewhat public as it's used in the `[unstable]` in `.cargo/config.toml`.

And because TOML cannot represent tuples there is no way to set it from the `[unstable]` section. This PR fix this oversight by using a custom deserializer method similar to what was already done for `build-std`.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants