Rollup of 5 pull requests #149591
Merged
Rollup of 5 pull requests #149591
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
This... is a weird test. It has two impls: - `impl<T> From<Foo<T>> for Box<T>` (commented out, more on that later), and - `impl<T> Into<Vec<T>> for Foo<T>` The idea of that test is to show that the first impl doesn't compile, but the second does, thus `TryFrom` should be using `Into` and not `From` (because `Into` is more general, since the `From` impl doesn't compile). However: 1. The types are different -- `Box` vs `Vec`, which is significant b/c `Box` is fundamental 2. The commented out impl actually compiles! (which wasn't detected b/c it's commented out :\ ) Here is a table for compilation of the impls: | | `Vec` | `Box` | |--------|--------------|----------------| | `From` | since 1.41.0 | never | | `Into` | always | not since 1.28 | [godbolt used to test this](https://godbolt.org/z/T38E3jGKa) Order of events: 1. in `1.28` the `incoherent_fundamental_impls` lint becomes deny by default (this is *not* mentioned in the changelog yay) 2. `1.32` changed absolutely nothing, even though this version is credited in the test 3. the test was added (I'm not exactly sure when) (see rust-lang#56796) 4. in `1.41` coherence was relaxed to allow `From`+`Vec` to compile To conclude: since `1.41` this test does nothing (and before that it was written in a way which did not detect this change). It looks to me like today (since `1.41`) we *could* bound `TryFrom` impl with `From` (but now it'd be a useless breaking change of course). Am I missing anything? Is there a useful version of this test that could be written?
We used to allow `T -> !` coercions (yes!! not `! -> T`) in unreachable code. This was later removed during 2018 stabilization attempt, see: - rust-lang#40800 - rust-lang@59688e1 - rust-lang#46325 I've kept `tests/ui/coercion/coerce-to-bang-cast.rs`, as that is a reasonable test for us *not* having `-> !` coercions.
Duplicate of `from_infer_breaking_with_unit_fallback.rs` and `question_mark_from_never.rs`
I don't think they are testing anything anymore
there are only 1 test in that directory, probably created by mistake.
…mingw` `rust-lld` is supposed to live in sysroot, so it doesn't change the behavior of the function, only removes a potential micro-optimization.
…onszelmann Remove an outdated test This... is a weird test. It has two impls: - `impl<T> From<Foo<T>> for Box<T>` (commented out, more on that later), and - `impl<T> Into<Vec<T>> for Foo<T>` The idea of that test is to show that the first impl doesn't compile, but the second does, thus `TryFrom` should be using `Into` and not `From` (because `Into` is more general, since the `From` impl doesn't compile). However: 1. The types are different -- `Box` vs `Vec`, which is significant b/c `Box` is fundamental 2. The commented out impl actually compiles! (which wasn't detected b/c it's commented out :\ ) Here is a table for compilation of the impls: | | `Vec` | `Box` | |--------|--------------|----------------| | `From` | since 1.41.0 | never | | `Into` | always | not since 1.28 | [godbolt used to test this](https://godbolt.org/z/T38E3jGKa) Order of events: 1. in `1.28` the `incoherent_fundamental_impls` lint becomes deny by default (this is *not* mentioned in the changelog yay) 2. `1.32` changed absolutely nothing, even though this version is credited in the test 3. the test was added (I'm not exactly sure when) (see rust-lang#56796) 4. in `1.41` coherence was relaxed to allow `From`+`Vec` to compile To conclude: since `1.41` this test does nothing (and before that it was written in a way which did not detect this change). It looks to me like today (since `1.41`) we *could* bound `TryFrom` impl with `From` (but now it'd be a useless breaking change of course). Am I missing anything? Is there a useful version of this test that could be written?
…=ChrisDenton Fix std::mem::drop rustdoc misleading statement This is a bit misleading, we were discussing this with our Rust team and some people could think that the compiler does some special magic for this specific function and that's not true or well the compiler does something special but for every function. The reality according to my understanding is that this is a normal function that takes ownership of the given value and as with every other function mir building injects Drop Terminators , drop elaboration refines this and then we would insert the corresponding drop glue, then potentially calling Drop::drop. Not sure if it would be best to remove the sentence as this PR does or explaining something along the lines of the previous text.
…, r=lqd Rename supertrait item shadowing lints This follows the lang team decision [here](rust-lang#148605 (comment)) and renames: - `supertrait_item_shadowing_definition` to `shadowing_supertrait_items` - `supertrait_item_shadowing_usage` to `resolving_to_items_shadowing_supertrait_items` The lint levels are left unchanged as allow-by-default until stabilization.
Various never type test improvements I want to make sure that the never type ui tests are actually sensible, and to do so I'm trying to clean them up. This mainly adds comments explaining test purposes and removes outdated stuff. I imagine best reviewed commit-by-commit, I tried to write useful descriptions and group things into small commits. cc `@lcnr` (I removed `fallback`/`nofallback` terminology in b5f82d4)
linker: Remove special case for `rust-lld` in `detect_self_contained_mingw` `rust-lld` is supposed to live inside sysroot, so it doesn't change the behavior of the function, only removes a potential micro-optimization. rust-lang#149178 (comment) r? `@mati865`
rustbot
added
S-waiting-on-review
Member
Author
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
Collaborator
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
Collaborator
Collaborator
|
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Collaborator
|
📌 Perf builds for each rolled up PR:
previous master: 568b117627 In the case of a perf regression, run the following command for each PR you suspect might be the cause: |
Contributor
What is this?This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.Comparing 568b117 (parent) -> 83e49b7 (this PR) Test differencesShow 172 test diffsStage 1
Stage 2
Additionally, 106 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy. Job group index
Test dashboardRun cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
test-dashboard 83e49b75e7daf827e4390ae0ccbcb0d0e2c96493 --output-dir test-dashboardAnd then open Job duration changes
How to interpret the job duration changes?Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance |
This was referenced Dec 3, 2025
Collaborator
|
Finished benchmarking commit (83e49b7): comparison URL. Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary -4.7%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 467.615s -> 469.131s (0.32%) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
8 participants
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.
Successful merges:
rust-lldindetect_self_contained_mingw#149590 (linker: Remove special case forrust-lldindetect_self_contained_mingw)r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup