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

Add testing back for the old backend on Windows in CI? #2844

Closed
bnjbvr opened this issue Apr 16, 2021 · 3 comments
Closed

Add testing back for the old backend on Windows in CI? #2844

bnjbvr opened this issue Apr 16, 2021 · 3 comments
Labels
bug Incorrect behavior in the current implementation that needs fixing cranelift Issues related to the Cranelift code generator

Comments

@bnjbvr
Copy link
Member

bnjbvr commented Apr 16, 2021

Thanks to a collaborative debugging session with @alexcrichton, we've identified what the issue was with my test case failing on Windows: it was a combination of using the old-backend (before the type-confusion bug had been fixed) and Windows, following #2806 that broke unwind information generation on windows old-backend (I'll send a PR for this).

So the real question is, should we re-add the CI on Windows for support of the old-backend?

  • If the plan is to remove the old-backend before the next release, that means that it won't be available later, so there's not a real point in maintaining it.
  • If the plan is to remove the old-backend after the next release, then it'd be nice to not break it in the future, and in this case it would be worthwhile adding it back in CI, in my opinion.
@bnjbvr bnjbvr added bug Incorrect behavior in the current implementation that needs fixing cranelift Issues related to the Cranelift code generator labels Apr 16, 2021
@cfallin
Copy link
Member

cfallin commented Apr 16, 2021

@bnjbvr thanks for bringing this up, and I think it would be a good idea to do so!

The plan, FWIW, is definitely to take it slow with the removal of the old backend: I will (at some point, after at least one more release) write up an RFC to propose removing it, and we'll want to seek out any folks who are still depending on it (and possibly hold off until we can e.g. make sure the migration path to the new backend works for everyone). For now, the old backend is definitely still supported, even if it is not evolving further.

@akirilov-arm
Copy link
Contributor

Obsoleted by #3009?

@cfallin
Copy link
Member

cfallin commented Oct 1, 2021

Indeed!

@cfallin cfallin closed this as completed Oct 1, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Incorrect behavior in the current implementation that needs fixing cranelift Issues related to the Cranelift code generator
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants