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

Rollup of 7 pull requests #108620

Merged
merged 22 commits into from
Mar 1, 2023
Merged

Rollup of 7 pull requests #108620

merged 22 commits into from
Mar 1, 2023

Conversation

Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup

Create a similar rollup

notriddle and others added 22 commits February 16, 2023 18:16
Co-Authored-By: GuillaumeGomez <guillaume1.gomez@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
Signed-off-by: Yuki Okushi <jtitor@2k36.org>
Make `x doc --open` work on every book

Before this PR, the `--open` flag had to be configured explicitly for every book, and most of them didn't configure it, resulting in the flag silently failing in all but two books.

In this PR, the code to check for the `--open` flag is in the underlying `RustbookSrc` step rather than all the individual steps. This is done by passing the parent step as a field of `RustbookSrc`, so that we can check for the correct step in `maybe_open_in_browser`.

This was part of a larger change that in the end wasn't worth it. Still, I think it could be useful as-is.
…r-errors

Recover from for-else and while-else

This recovers from attempts at writing for-else or while-else loops, which might help users coming from e.g. Python.
```rs
for _ in 0..0 {
  // ...
} else {
  // ...
}
```
Combined with trying to store it in a let binding, the current diagnostic can be a bit confusing. It mentions let-else and suggests wrapping the loop in parentheses, which the user probably doesn't want. let-else doesn't make sense for `for` and `while` loops, as they are of type `()` (which already is an irrefutable pattern and doesn't need let-else).
<details>
<summary>Current diagnostic</summary>

```rs
error: right curly brace `}` before `else` in a `let...else` statement not allowed
 --> src/main.rs:4:5
  |
4 |     } else {
  |     ^
  |
help: wrap the expression in parentheses
  |
2 ~     let _x = (for _ in 0..0 {
3 |
4 ~     }) else {
  |
```
</details>

Some questions:
- Can the wording for the error message be improved? Would "for...else loops are not allowed" fit better?
- Should we be more "conservative" in case we want to support this in the future (i.e. say "for...else loops are **currently** not allowed/supported")?
- Is there a better way than storing a `&'static str` for the loop type? It is used for substituting the placeholder in the locale file (since it can emit either `for...else` or `while...else`). Maybe there is an enum I could use that I couldn't find
…w, r=Amanieu

Fix `VecDeque::append` capacity overflow for ZSTs

Fixes rust-lang#108454.
…iler-errors

Make associated_item_def_ids for traits use an unstable option to also return associated types for RPITITs

r? `@compiler-errors`
@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. rollup A PR which is a rollup labels Mar 1, 2023
@Dylan-DPC
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r+ rollup=never p=5

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 1, 2023

📌 Commit 02e4eef has been approved by Dylan-DPC

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Mar 1, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 1, 2023

⌛ Testing commit 02e4eef with merge f77bfb7...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 1, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Dylan-DPC
Pushing f77bfb7 to master...

1 similar comment
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Mar 1, 2023

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: Dylan-DPC
Pushing f77bfb7 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Mar 1, 2023
@bors bors merged commit f77bfb7 into rust-lang:master Mar 1, 2023
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Perf Build Sha

previous master: f77bfb7336

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.69.0 milestone Mar 1, 2023
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:

PR# Perf Build Sha
#108605 9cd7f7fe38bacff3a4ca37110e6c88228041de72
#108604 99a3ffe183db38b18f2d38e5184744b36da0bda1
#108568 e16927ca3f7389508ca6099128d544c72d4ecc2e
#108462 ae7995574a7aa68f7f648c63beb98b431c214981
#108427 d98cf3377ae6d2a8e48c6a3a232a94d7608d28e4
#108394 9cfda22975b2f9a6ce6b635f031bd948b178bbdd
#108143 e628db28bf05f6d6bb6c0c991efa008f70db7cc4

previous master: 609496eecf

In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: @rust-timer build $SHA

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (f77bfb7): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
1.3% [1.3%, 1.3%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
4.3% [4.3%, 4.3%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.6% [0.9%, 4.7%] 31
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.0% [-3.4%, -2.6%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) 4.3% [4.3%, 4.3%] 1

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. rollup A PR which is a rollup S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

10 participants