This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 30, 2022. It is now read-only.
Don't flag functions with user-defined datatypes as changes #39
Conversation
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
Comment on lines
+38
to
+45
| let from_args = | ||
| tcx.ty_list_eq(&prev.sig.inputs_and_output, &next.sig.inputs_and_output); | ||
|
|
||
| let is_unchanged = tcx | ||
| .ty_list_eq(&prev.sig.inputs_and_output, &next.sig.inputs_and_output) | ||
| && prev.sig.c_variadic == next.sig.c_variadic | ||
| && prev.sig.unsafety == next.sig.unsafety | ||
| && prev.sig.abi == next.sig.abi; |
|
|
||
| use rustc_middle::ty::{self, List, TyCtxt, TyKind}; | ||
|
|
||
| pub(crate) trait Compare { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this looks a lot like impl Eq
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Previous type equality was performed with
ptr::eq. It was nice because rustc is built such that "if two types are equal, then they are the same pointer". This is really good for internal compiler development, this not work well here, because the two types may come from the two versions of the crate we're analyzing (ie:previous::path::to::Typeandnext::path::to::Type), whichtriggers incorrect modifications in situations such as:This PR fixes this behaviour by adding a custom equality implementation. The idea is simple: if
ptr::eqreturns false, then we check if the two types are ADTs or not. If this is the case, we compare their paths. This solution is maybe not future-proof, but it works well for now. These functions will make easier the handling of other languages items such as struct/enum.Fix #38.