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

Breaking Change - encode_utf8 destabilised #32460

Closed
thepowersgang opened this Issue Mar 24, 2016 · 8 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@thepowersgang
Copy link
Contributor

thepowersgang commented Mar 24, 2016

The change 2b3c5ac converted char::encode_utf8 from a stable method of an unstable trait to an unstable method.

The trait CharExt is imported as part of libcore's prelude, which can be done on the stable build (see https://play.rust-lang.org/?gist=7320c1273bdc3dde5450&version=stable).
Under current nightly, the same code fails to compile due to this same API.

This is technically a regression, and may need a crater run to check if it breaks anything (unlikely), and may need closer scrutiny.

@thepowersgang

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

thepowersgang commented Mar 24, 2016

@thepowersgang

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

thepowersgang commented Mar 24, 2016

Note, discussion in the PR #32204 on the relevant lines. Appears that breakage was acknowledged and assumed to not have any impact.

@bluss

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

bluss commented Mar 24, 2016

It's a regression in the sense that it breaks / changes behavior of stable code (but this doesn't alone imply that, or imply that it not, needs to be fixed.)

@alexcrichton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

alexcrichton commented Mar 24, 2016

triage: I-nominated

nominating for discussion in a libs triage meeting. @thepowersgang is this enough enough to work around for you? For example, do you have crates that build on stable which require this method?

Ideally we could let this slide, but if the breakage is too much we'll just have to bite the bullet and revert.

@thepowersgang

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

thepowersgang commented Mar 24, 2016

The only breakage I had was on a nightly-only project, I just noted that I needed to add a feature flag to a crate that didn't need any originally (so no real problem at all).

I just created this ticket to make sure that it was noticed and properly documented.

@alexcrichton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

alexcrichton commented Mar 24, 2016

Ok, thanks for the info and heads up! We'll discuss this at the next meeting and can decide what to do.

@thepowersgang

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

thepowersgang commented Mar 24, 2016

Note - I am all for the new API, so if this change doesn't impact anyone else then probably just as good to keep it.

@alexcrichton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

alexcrichton commented Mar 31, 2016

The libs team discussed this regression during triage today and the decision was that this is acceptable for now. This is a clear case of fixing a bug. We'll do a crater run to analyze more crates and see what pops up, though.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.