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

Update path remapping #39130

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Update path remapping #39130

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

jsgf
Copy link
Contributor

@jsgf jsgf commented Jan 17, 2017

This is an update of PR #38348 to fix issue #38322. It allows arbitrary numbers of mappings, and attempts to handle relative remap paths to work as expected on relative source paths.

@rust-highfive
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @eddyb (or someone else) soon.

If any changes to this PR are deemed necessary, please add them as extra commits. This ensures that the reviewer can see what has changed since they last reviewed the code. Due to the way GitHub handles out-of-date commits, this should also make it reasonably obvious what issues have or haven't been addressed. Large or tricky changes may require several passes of review and changes.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

- allow arbitrary numbers of remappings
- if we're remapping an absolute path, make the remappings absolute
@eddyb
Copy link
Member

eddyb commented Jan 17, 2017

r? @michaelwoerister

@michaelwoerister
Copy link
Member

michaelwoerister commented Jan 17, 2017

Thanks for the PR! This looks like a step in the right direction (multiple remappings, better handling of relative paths) but here are some things to note:

  • We have not actually reached an agreement on what the command line interface should look like in the other PR.
  • It's not clear whether we should do path remapping in absolute/canonical space. I'd like to but GCC doesn't seem to do that.
  • I think we should have a clear specification of the remapping logic and a test suite that makes sure we actually implement it correctly. The currently code is already pretty inconsistent.

I'll try to make some progress clarifying the actual logic in the original issue (#38322) soonish.

@jsgf
Copy link
Contributor Author

jsgf commented Jan 17, 2017

@michaelwoerister Thanks - the main reason for posting this is to try and kick things along a bit. This is an issue I've started running into, so I'd like to see it resolved.

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 5, 2017

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #39563) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@Mark-Simulacrum Mark-Simulacrum added the S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). label Apr 14, 2017
@arielb1 arielb1 added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Apr 15, 2017
@jsgf
Copy link
Contributor Author

jsgf commented Apr 20, 2017

Superseded by #41419

@jsgf jsgf closed this Apr 20, 2017
@jsgf jsgf deleted the path-remap branch February 18, 2018 23:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-team Status: Awaiting decision from the relevant subteam (see the T-<team> label). T-compiler Relevant to the compiler 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

8 participants