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

Tracking Issue for Rust 2024: rustfmt enable overflow_delimited_expr #123751

Open
2 of 4 tasks
traviscross opened this issue Apr 10, 2024 · 11 comments
Open
2 of 4 tasks

Tracking Issue for Rust 2024: rustfmt enable overflow_delimited_expr #123751

traviscross opened this issue Apr 10, 2024 · 11 comments
Assignees
Labels
A-edition-2024 Area: The 2024 edition A-rustfmt Area: Rustfmt C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. I-style-nominated Nominated for discussion during a style team meeting. S-tracking-needs-documentation Status: Needs documentation. T-style Relevant to the style team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Comments

@traviscross
Copy link
Contributor

traviscross commented Apr 10, 2024

This is a tracking issue for the Rust 2024-relevant parts of:

This issue is for tracking readiness for the Rust 2024 edition.

About tracking issues

Tracking issues are used to record the overall progress of implementation. They are also used as hubs connecting to other relevant issues, e.g., bugs or open design questions. A tracking issue is however not meant for large scale discussion, questions, or bug reports about a feature. Instead, open a dedicated issue for the specific matter and add the relevant feature gate label.

Steps

cc @rust-lang/style @rust-lang/rustfmt @calebcartwright @pitaj

@traviscross traviscross added C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. T-style Relevant to the style team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. A-edition-2024 Area: The 2024 edition A-rustfmt Area: Rustfmt labels Apr 10, 2024
@tmandry
Copy link
Member

tmandry commented Apr 17, 2024

It looks like there's no owner driving forward on an implementation, which we need by May 1. If there's no owner of this we should take it out of the style guide for 2024.

@calebcartwright Is this something you can own the implementation of? If not, is there an alternative owner?

@calebcartwright
Copy link
Member

It looks like there's no owner driving forward on an implementation, which we need by May 1

Not objecting to this specific deadline, but also first I'm hearing of a May 1st date. Is there a communication channel I should be monitoring?

@calebcartwright Is this something you can own the implementation of? If not, is there an alternative owner?

Sure put my name down. I'm a little puzzled by the overall approach to tracking these, likely due to my own ignorance. The "implementation" is changing a boolean value, so for my own 0.02 this all feels a bit too detailed and granular 🤷

@traviscross traviscross added the I-style-nominated Nominated for discussion during a style team meeting. label Apr 17, 2024
@pitaj
Copy link
Contributor

pitaj commented Apr 17, 2024

Just want to bring up a caveat.

I don't know how well tested the rustfmt feature is. There may or may not be some behavior differences between the current implementation in rustfmt and the specified behavior in the style guide.

@ytmimi
Copy link
Contributor

ytmimi commented Apr 17, 2024

rustdoc? do you mean rustfmt?

@pitaj
Copy link
Contributor

pitaj commented Apr 17, 2024

rustdoc? do you mean rustfmt?

Woops yes, fixed

@ytmimi
Copy link
Contributor

ytmimi commented Apr 17, 2024

I don't know how well tested the rustfmt feature is. There may or may not be some behavior differences between the current implementation in rustfmt and the specified behavior in the style guide.

looks like there are some tests in rustfmt. Given that overflow_delimited_expr is still unstable I think it wouldn't hurt to double check that the implementation matches what's described in the style guide and maybe add some extra test cases.

@ytmimi
Copy link
Contributor

ytmimi commented Apr 17, 2024

@pitaj I believe the formatting issues you brought up in #114764 (comment) and #114764 (comment) are still issues for rustfmt unless this is the correct formatting based on the style guide:

running with overflow_delimited_expr=true

fn main() {
vbuf.write(i * 3, Bar(
    Foo { x: 1, y: 2, z: 3 },
    Foo { x: 1, y: 2, z: 3 },
    Foo { x: 1, y: 2, z: 3 },
));

vbuf.write(i + 3, &[
    [h - 0.1, v],
    [h - 0.1, v],
    [h - 0.1, v],
    [h - 0.1, v],
]);
}

into

fn main() {
    vbuf.write(
        i * 3,
        Bar(Foo { x: 1, y: 2, z: 3 }, Foo { x: 1, y: 2, z: 3 }, Foo {
            x: 1,
            y: 2,
            z: 3,
        }),
    );

    vbuf.write(i + 3, &[[h - 0.1, v], [h - 0.1, v], [h - 0.1, v], [
        h - 0.1,
        v,
    ]]);
}

@pitaj
Copy link
Contributor

pitaj commented Apr 17, 2024

I consider those cases unfortunate, but they actually do match the behavior as currently specified by the style guide.

I did try my hand at writing up a policy to adjust for those, but it wasn't included in the end.

I think users can use comments to force specific formatting in those cases.

@ytmimi
Copy link
Contributor

ytmimi commented Apr 17, 2024

How common are those cases? I can image that some users might find this formatting worse than overflow_delimited_expr=false.

@calebcartwright I know that technically the implementation is as simple as flipping a boolean to enable this by default, but I'd also want to stabilize overflow_delimited_expr at the same time so users at least have the option to turn this off.

@joshtriplett
Copy link
Member

@pitaj wrote:

I did try my hand at writing up a policy to adjust for those, but it wasn't included in the end.

I don't think I've seen that, and I'd love to. This is still an area I'd love to further improve in future style editions, along with the "this is simple" heuristics.

@pitaj
Copy link
Contributor

pitaj commented Sep 4, 2024

My attempt: b754b33

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-edition-2024 Area: The 2024 edition A-rustfmt Area: Rustfmt C-tracking-issue Category: A tracking issue for an RFC or an unstable feature. I-style-nominated Nominated for discussion during a style team meeting. S-tracking-needs-documentation Status: Needs documentation. T-style Relevant to the style team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants