Skip to content

lints_that_dont_need_to_run: never skip future-compat-reported lints #133108

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 20, 2024

Conversation

RalfJung
Copy link
Member

Follow-up to #125116: future-compat lints show up with --json=future-incompat even if they are otherwise allowed in the crate. So let's ensure we do not skip those as part of the lints_that_dont_need_to_run logic.

I could not find a current future compat lint that is emitted by a lint pass, so there's no clear way to add a test for this.

Cc @blyxyas @cjgillot

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 16, 2024

r? @lcnr

rustbot has assigned @lcnr.
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 Nov 16, 2024
Copy link
Member

@blyxyas blyxyas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looking good, just a question:

let has_future_breakage =
lint.future_incompatible.is_some_and(|fut| fut.reason.has_future_breakage());
!has_future_breakage && !lint.eval_always
})
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a reason to have these two as different methods?

Copy link
Member Author

@RalfJung RalfJung Nov 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's easier to first do the pure filtering, and then the filter_map part that also transforms the data. This also reduces rightward drift in the filter_map closure.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

could the fitire breakage check be moved earlier? i.e. automatically set eval_always for all future breakage lints

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That would require putting the logic for this into the declare_lint macro. IMO that's a bad idea, I'd rather not have this logic hidden in a macro.

@lcnr
Copy link
Contributor

lcnr commented Nov 19, 2024

r=me after nit

@RalfJung RalfJung force-pushed the future-compat-needs-to-run branch from e7d2d4c to df94818 Compare November 19, 2024 21:04
@RalfJung
Copy link
Member Author

@bors r=lcnr

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Nov 19, 2024

📌 Commit df94818 has been approved by lcnr

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 Nov 19, 2024
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Nov 20, 2024
Rollup of 5 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#132732 (Use attributes for `dangling_pointers_from_temporaries` lint)
 - rust-lang#133108 (lints_that_dont_need_to_run: never skip future-compat-reported lints)
 - rust-lang#133190 (CI: use free runner in dist-aarch64-msvc)
 - rust-lang#133196 (Make rustc --explain compatible with BusyBox less)
 - rust-lang#133216 (Implement `~const Fn` trait goal in the new solver)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit a175db1 into rust-lang:master Nov 20, 2024
6 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.84.0 milestone Nov 20, 2024
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Nov 20, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#133108 - RalfJung:future-compat-needs-to-run, r=lcnr

lints_that_dont_need_to_run: never skip future-compat-reported lints

Follow-up to rust-lang#125116: future-compat lints show up with `--json=future-incompat` even if they are otherwise allowed in the crate. So let's ensure we do not skip those as part of the `lints_that_dont_need_to_run` logic.

I could not find a current future compat lint that is emitted by a lint pass, so there's no clear way to add a test for this.

Cc `@blyxyas` `@cjgillot`
@RalfJung RalfJung deleted the future-compat-needs-to-run branch November 20, 2024 12:33
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. 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.

5 participants