Skip to content

/rust

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 RFC #2145: Type privacy and private-in-public lints #48054

Open
aturon opened this Issue Feb 7, 2018 · 0 comments

Comments

Assignees

@petrochenkov petrochenkov

Labels
B-RFC-approved C-tracking-issue T-lang
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
2 participants
@aturon @petrochenkov
@aturon
Copy link
Member

aturon commented Feb 7, 2018 •
edited by pietroalbini

This is a tracking issue for the RFC "Type privacy and private-in-public lints " (rust-lang/rfcs#2145).

Steps:

Unresolved questions:

  • It's not fully clear if the restriction for associated type definitions required for
    type privacy soundness, or it's just a workaround for a technical difficulty.

  • Interactions between macros 2.0 and the notions of reachability / effective
    visibility used for the lints are unclear.

@aturon aturon referenced this issue Feb 7, 2018

Merged

RFC: Type privacy and private-in-public lints #2145

@aturon aturon added B-RFC-approved T-lang C-tracking-issue labels Feb 7, 2018

@leodasvacas leodasvacas referenced this issue Mar 4, 2018

Open

Tracking issue for `impl Trait` (RFC 1522, RFC 1951, RFC 2071) #34511

19 of 29 tasks complete

@petrochenkov petrochenkov referenced this issue May 21, 2018

Merged

libcore: Add VaList and variadic arg handling intrinsics #49878

@petrochenkov petrochenkov referenced this issue Jul 21, 2018

Closed

Audit deprecation lints and hardcoded warnings and turn most of them into errors in 2018 edition #52593

@petrochenkov petrochenkov referenced this issue Dec 26, 2018

Merged

privacy: Use common `DefId` visiting infrastructure for all privacy visitors #56878

bors added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 31, 2018

@bors
Auto merge of #56878 - petrochenkov:privdyn, r=arielb1 
privacy: Use common `DefId` visiting infrastructure for all privacy visitors

One repeating pattern in privacy checking is going through a type, visiting all `DefId`s inside it and doing something with them.
This is the case because visibilities and reachabilities are attached to `DefId`s.

Previously various privacy visitors visited types slightly differently using their own methods, with most recently written `TypePrivacyVisitor` being the "gold standard".
This mostly worked okay, but differences could manifest in overly conservative reachability analysis, some errors being reported twice, some private-in-public lints (not errors) being wrongly reported or not reported.

This PR does something that I wanted to do since #32674 (comment) - factoring out the common visiting logic!
Now all the common logic is contained in `struct DefIdVisitorSkeleton`, with specific privacy visitors deciding only what to do with visited `DefId`s (via `trait DefIdVisitor`).

A bunch of cleanups is also applied in the process.
This area is somewhat tricky due to lots of easily miss-able details, but thankfully it's was well covered by tests in #46083 and previous PRs, so I'm relatively sure in the refactoring correctness.

Fixes #56837 (comment) in particular.
Also this will help with implementing #48054.
Loading status checks…
fe6a54d

@petrochenkov petrochenkov referenced this issue Jan 14, 2019

Merged

Implement public/private dependency feature #57586

4 of 4 tasks complete

@petrochenkov petrochenkov self-assigned this Feb 5, 2019

@petrochenkov petrochenkov referenced this issue Feb 5, 2019

Closed

Change privacy checks, particularly for tuple structs #58173

@petrochenkov petrochenkov referenced this issue Feb 28, 2019

Open

Tracking issue for `private_in_public` compatibility lint. #34537

3 of 5 tasks complete

@petrochenkov petrochenkov referenced this issue Mar 11, 2019

Closed

Spurious private-in-public error for impl block #59090

@petrochenkov petrochenkov referenced this issue Apr 3, 2019

Open

Minimum lint levels for C-future-compatibility issues #59658

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.