-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.6k
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
Turn remaining non-structural-const-in-pattern lints into hard errors #124661
Turn remaining non-structural-const-in-pattern lints into hard errors #124661
Conversation
Some changes occurred in match checking cc @Nadrieril |
6ef7b3c
to
cbd682b
Compare
@bors try |
…atterns, r=<try> Turn remaining non-structural-const-in-pattern lints into hard errors This completes the implementation of rust-lang#120362 by turning out remaining future-compat lints into hard errors: indirect_structural_match and pointer_structural_match. They have been future-compat lints for a while (indirect_structural_match for many years, pointer_structural_match since Rust 1.75), and have shown up in dependency breakage reports since Rust 1.78 (released yesterday). I don't expect any code will still depend on them, but we will of course do a crater run. A lot of cleanup is now possible in const_to_pat, but that is deferred to a later PR. Fixes rust-lang#70861
☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions |
@craterbot check |
👌 Experiment ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more |
🚧 Experiment ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more |
🎉 Experiment
|
Many of these are caused by On crates.io we have two true regression:
The github failures are either false positives, duplicates of one of these crates, or advent of code repos. I think we can go ahead and land this. (Remember, if it lands now crate authors still have until July 25th before this hits stable.) Nominating for t-lang. |
Oh noes, it doesn't sequence the commands to remove the label before firing off the rfcbot command! @rfcbot cancel |
@pnkfelix proposal cancelled. |
@rfcbot fcp merge (I'm just preemptively firing up a T-lang FCP to approve this change.) |
Team member @pnkfelix has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members: No concerns currently listed. Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! cc @rust-lang/lang-advisors: FCP proposed for lang, please feel free to register concerns. |
@rfcbot reviewed
…On Tue, May 14, 2024, at 1:54 PM, Rust RFC bot wrote:
Team member @pnkfelix <https://github.com/pnkfelix> has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members:
• @joshtriplett <https://github.com/joshtriplett>
• @nikomatsakis <https://github.com/nikomatsakis>
• @pnkfelix <https://github.com/pnkfelix>
• @scottmcm <https://github.com/scottmcm>
• @tmandry <https://github.com/tmandry>
No concerns currently listed.
Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up!
cc @rust-lang/lang-advisors <https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/lang-advisors>: FCP proposed for lang, please feel free to register concerns.
See this document <https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcbot-rs/blob/master/README.md> for info about what commands tagged team members can give me.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#124661 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABF4ZXIYZS3B6MPDUODVBLZCJFUZAVCNFSM6AAAAABHFSCSYGVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCMJQHAYDIMBQGE>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
@rustbot labels -I-lang-nominated We discussed this in the triage meeting today, and it's now in FCP. |
The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete. As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed. This will be merged soon. |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (5fe5543): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -0.2%, secondary 0.3%)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.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 671.39s -> 670.355s (-0.15%) |
This completes the implementation of #120362 by turning our remaining future-compat lints into hard errors: indirect_structural_match and pointer_structural_match.
They have been future-compat lints for a while (indirect_structural_match for many years, pointer_structural_match since Rust 1.75 (released Dec 28, 2023)), and have shown up in dependency breakage reports since Rust 1.78 (just released on May 2, 2024). I don't expect a lot of code will still depend on them, but we will of course do a crater run.
A lot of cleanup is now possible in const_to_pat, but that is deferred to a later PR.
Fixes #70861