Skip to content

Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint #94433

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
Mar 3, 2022

Conversation

Urgau
Copy link
Member

@Urgau Urgau commented Feb 27, 2022

This pull-request improve the allowness (#[allow(...)]) of the unexpected_cfgs lint.

Before this PR only crate level #![allow(unexpected_cfgs)] worked, now with this PR it also work when put around cfg! or if it is in a upper level. Making it work for the attributes cfg, cfg_attr, ... for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.

Found while working on #94298.
r? @petrochenkov

@rustbot rustbot added the T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Feb 27, 2022
@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Feb 27, 2022
@petrochenkov petrochenkov 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 Feb 28, 2022
@Urgau Urgau force-pushed the check-cfg-allowness branch from 8f3855a to b8a3929 Compare February 28, 2022 23:02
@Urgau
Copy link
Member Author

Urgau commented Feb 28, 2022

Address review comments.

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Feb 28, 2022
@petrochenkov petrochenkov 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 Mar 1, 2022
@Urgau
Copy link
Member Author

Urgau commented Mar 1, 2022

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Mar 1, 2022
@Urgau Urgau force-pushed the check-cfg-allowness branch from d76a180 to 765205b Compare March 1, 2022 13:29
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks!
@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Mar 1, 2022

📌 Commit 765205b has been approved by petrochenkov

@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, 2022
Dylan-DPC added a commit to Dylan-DPC/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 1, 2022
…henkov

Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint

This pull-request improve the allowness (`#[allow(...)]`) of the `unexpected_cfgs` lint.

Before this PR only crate level `#![allow(unexpected_cfgs)]` worked, now with this PR it also work when put around `cfg!` or if it is in a upper level. Making it work ~for the attributes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, ...~ for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.

Found while working on rust-lang#94298.
r? `@petrochenkov`
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 1, 2022
…henkov

Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint

This pull-request improve the allowness (`#[allow(...)]`) of the `unexpected_cfgs` lint.

Before this PR only crate level `#![allow(unexpected_cfgs)]` worked, now with this PR it also work when put around `cfg!` or if it is in a upper level. Making it work ~for the attributes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, ...~ for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.

Found while working on rust-lang#94298.
r? ``@petrochenkov``
Dylan-DPC added a commit to Dylan-DPC/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2022
…henkov

Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint

This pull-request improve the allowness (`#[allow(...)]`) of the `unexpected_cfgs` lint.

Before this PR only crate level `#![allow(unexpected_cfgs)]` worked, now with this PR it also work when put around `cfg!` or if it is in a upper level. Making it work ~for the attributes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, ...~ for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.

Found while working on rust-lang#94298.
r? ```@petrochenkov```
Dylan-DPC added a commit to Dylan-DPC/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2022
…henkov

Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint

This pull-request improve the allowness (`#[allow(...)]`) of the `unexpected_cfgs` lint.

Before this PR only crate level `#![allow(unexpected_cfgs)]` worked, now with this PR it also work when put around `cfg!` or if it is in a upper level. Making it work ~for the attributes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, ...~ for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.

Found while working on rust-lang#94298.
r? ````@petrochenkov````
Dylan-DPC added a commit to Dylan-DPC/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2022
…henkov

Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint

This pull-request improve the allowness (`#[allow(...)]`) of the `unexpected_cfgs` lint.

Before this PR only crate level `#![allow(unexpected_cfgs)]` worked, now with this PR it also work when put around `cfg!` or if it is in a upper level. Making it work ~for the attributes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, ...~ for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.

Found while working on rust-lang#94298.
r? `````@petrochenkov`````
@Urgau Urgau mentioned this pull request Mar 2, 2022
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2022
…henkov

Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint

This pull-request improve the allowness (`#[allow(...)]`) of the `unexpected_cfgs` lint.

Before this PR only crate level `#![allow(unexpected_cfgs)]` worked, now with this PR it also work when put around `cfg!` or if it is in a upper level. Making it work ~for the attributes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, ...~ for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.

Found while working on rust-lang#94298.
r? ``````@petrochenkov``````
Dylan-DPC added a commit to Dylan-DPC/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2022
…henkov

Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint

This pull-request improve the allowness (`#[allow(...)]`) of the `unexpected_cfgs` lint.

Before this PR only crate level `#![allow(unexpected_cfgs)]` worked, now with this PR it also work when put around `cfg!` or if it is in a upper level. Making it work ~for the attributes `cfg`, `cfg_attr`, ...~ for the same level is awkward as the current code is design to give "Some parent node that is close to this macro call" (cf. https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_expand/base/struct.ExpansionData.html) meaning that allow on the same line as an attribute won't work. I'm note even sure if this would be possible.

Found while working on rust-lang#94298.
r? ```````@petrochenkov```````
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2022
Rollup of 9 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#92061 (update char signess for openbsd)
 - rust-lang#93072 (Compatible variants suggestion with desugaring)
 - rust-lang#93354 (Add documentation about `BorrowedFd::to_owned`.)
 - rust-lang#93663 (Rename `BorrowedFd::borrow_raw_fd` to `BorrowedFd::borrow_raw`.)
 - rust-lang#94375 (Adt copy suggestions)
 - rust-lang#94433 (Improve allowness of the unexpected_cfgs lint)
 - rust-lang#94499 (Documentation was missed when demoting Windows XP to no_std only)
 - rust-lang#94505 (Restore the local filter on mono item sorting)
 - rust-lang#94529 (Unused doc comments blocks)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 493ed7a into rust-lang:master Mar 3, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.61.0 milestone Mar 3, 2022
@Urgau Urgau deleted the check-cfg-allowness branch May 5, 2023 16:46
# 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