add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function - #162379
Merged
Merged
Conversation
…const_check function
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Collaborator
|
|
oli-obk
approved these changes
Sep 7, 2026
Contributor
rust-bors
Bot
added
S-waiting-on-bors
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
… r=oli-obk add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function IMO this is crucial, to ensure that we cannot break users by changing the body of such a function to something no-longer-const-compatible. r? @oli-obk
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
… r=oli-obk add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function IMO this is crucial, to ensure that we cannot break users by changing the body of such a function to something no-longer-const-compatible. r? @oli-obk
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
… r=oli-obk add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function IMO this is crucial, to ensure that we cannot break users by changing the body of such a function to something no-longer-const-compatible. r? @oli-obk
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
…uwer Rollup of 3 pull requests Successful merges: - #161896 (Remove fields from TypeKind: Array, Slice) - #162354 (Make comptime functions ineligible for coverage) - #162379 (add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function) Failed merges: - #162294 (Reflection refactor ptrs)
Member
|
@bors try jobs=test-armhf-gnu |
Contributor
|
⌛ Trying commit 714b06b with merge 6115fff… To cancel the try build, run the command Workflow: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/actions/runs/34121360613 |
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function try-job: test-armhf-gnu
Member
|
@bors try cancel |
Contributor
|
Try build cancelled. Cancelled workflows: Hint: if you want to run another try build, you do not need to manually cancel the previous one. Just run |
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
… r=oli-obk add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function IMO this is crucial, to ensure that we cannot break users by changing the body of such a function to something no-longer-const-compatible. r? @oli-obk
JonathanBrouwer
added a commit
to JonathanBrouwer/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
… r=oli-obk add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function IMO this is crucial, to ensure that we cannot break users by changing the body of such a function to something no-longer-const-compatible. r? @oli-obk
This was referenced Sep 7, 2026
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
…uwer Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - #158153 (avoid spurious lifetime diagnostic in async generic case) - #160197 (Restrict LLVM inline asm location cookie usage. Fixes #150451) - #162413 (Unconditionally invalidate the library when the compiler changes) - #162294 (Reflection refactor ptrs) - #162354 (Make comptime functions ineligible for coverage) - #162379 (add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function) - #162386 (Add a regression test for trailing attributes in doctests) - #162410 (std: remove exceed whitespace in docs) - #162420 (mir_build: Don't pass a redundant `scrutinee_span` to some MIR-build methods) - #162430 (rustc-dev-guide subtree update) - #162431 (add next-solver FIXMEs)
rust-bors Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
Rollup merge of #162379 - RalfJung:rustc_do_not_const_check, r=oli-obk add test ensuring we refuse to const-eval the body of a rustc_do_not_const_check function IMO this is crucial, to ensure that we cannot break users by changing the body of such a function to something no-longer-const-compatible. r? @oli-obk
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
IMO this is crucial, to ensure that we cannot break users by changing the body of such a function to something no-longer-const-compatible.
r? @oli-obk