Skip to content

rustc_codegen_llvm: less pubs #127274

New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

klensy
Copy link
Contributor

@klensy klensy commented Jul 3, 2024

This removes few pubs around and slaps dead_codes around.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jul 3, 2024

r? @cjgillot

rustbot has assigned @cjgillot.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jul 3, 2024
Comment on lines 298 to 299
#[allow(dead_code)]
pub enum TypeKind {
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This suspiciously unused, TypeKind from rustc_codegen_ssa used around instead.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is #85677

@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor

tgross35 commented Jul 4, 2024

Could we use #[expect(...)] instead of allow since that is available now? So we remember to remove the attributes if they wind up being used

@cjgillot
Copy link
Contributor

cjgillot commented Jul 4, 2024

Why not just remove the dead code?

@klensy
Copy link
Contributor Author

klensy commented Jul 4, 2024

Why not just remove the dead code?

Tail call stuff was added in #112791 and in process of implementation, as i understand; other ones require changes in c++ part, will check that.

Could we use #[expect(...)] instead of allow

Nice, will change that stuff.

@rustbot author

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 4, 2024
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jul 9, 2024

Some changes occurred in coverage instrumentation.

cc @Zalathar

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

The job x86_64-gnu-tools failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
+ python3 ../x.py test --stage 2 check-tools
##[group]Building bootstrap
    Finished `dev` profile [unoptimized] target(s) in 0.04s
##[endgroup]
ERROR: Tool `book` was not recorded in tool state.
ERROR: Tool `nomicon` was not recorded in tool state.
ERROR: Tool `reference` was not recorded in tool state.
ERROR: Tool `rust-by-example` was not recorded in tool state.
ERROR: Tool `edition-guide` was not recorded in tool state.
ERROR: Tool `embedded-book` was not recorded in tool state.
  local time: Tue Jul  9 13:10:19 UTC 2024
  network time: Tue, 09 Jul 2024 13:10:19 GMT
##[error]Process completed with exit code 1.
Post job cleanup.

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 29, 2024

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #125443) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

@JohnCSimon
Copy link
Member

@klensy
ping from triage - can you post your status on this PR? This PR has not received an update in a few months.

@alex-semenyuk
Copy link
Member

@klensy
Form wg-triage. Closed this PR due to inactivity. Feel free to reopen or raised new one. Thanks for your efforts.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. 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.

8 participants