Slim rustc_parse_format dependencies down by Veykril · Pull Request #138602 · rust-lang/rust (original) (raw)

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 andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Conversation17 Commits1 Checks6 Files changed

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

[ Show hidden characters]({{ revealButtonHref }})

Veykril

rustc_index is only used for its size assertion macro, so demote it to a dev-dependency gated under testing instead. This allows the crate to built without having to wait for syn (pulled in by rustc_index_macros)

Alternatively we could inline the macro, though from the looks of it that will run into trouble with rustc_randomized_layouts

@rustbot

r? @SparrowLii

rustbot has assigned @SparrowLii.
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

Mar 17, 2025

@klensy

If this for optimizing deps for r-a, you can add nightly feature like here and gate that macro?

default = ["nightly", "randomize"]
# rust-analyzer depends on this crate and we therefore require it to built on a stable toolchain
# without depending on rustc_data_structures, rustc_macros and rustc_serialize
nightly = [

Oh, this authored by you.

@Veykril

r-a will depend on rustc_index either way, the change here only allows rustc_parse_format to build earlier instead of waiting on rustc_index which waits for rustc_index_macros which waits aeons for syn to build.

@SparrowLii

Thanks! Can you resolve the confilct?

SparrowLii

@SparrowLii

@bors

📌 Commit 7fdb7bd has been approved by SparrowLii

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors

🌲 The tree is currently closed for pull requests below priority 100. This pull request will be tested once the tree is reopened.

@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 18, 2025

Sakib25800 added a commit to Sakib25800/rust that referenced this pull request

Mar 19, 2025

@Sakib25800

…owLii

Slim rustc_parse_format dependencies down

rustc_index is only used for its size assertion macro, so demote it to a dev-dependency gated under testing instead. This allows the crate to built without having to wait for syn (pulled in by rustc_index_macros)

Alternatively we could inline the macro, though from the looks of it that will run into trouble with rustc_randomized_layouts

@bors

@bors bors 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-bors

Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.

labels

Mar 19, 2025

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request

Mar 19, 2025

@bors

…iaskrgr

Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost @rustbot modify labels: rollup

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request

Mar 19, 2025

@bors

…iaskrgr

Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

Failed merges:

r? @ghost @rustbot modify labels: rollup

@jieyouxu

@bors p=1 (somewhat conflict-prone)

@bors

🔒 Merge conflict

This pull request and the master branch diverged in a way that cannot be automatically merged. Please rebase on top of the latest master branch, and let the reviewer approve again.

How do I rebase?

Assuming self is your fork and upstream is this repository, you can resolve the conflict following these steps:

  1. git checkout push-purxoytpktpu (switch to your branch)
  2. git fetch upstream master (retrieve the latest master)
  3. git rebase upstream/master -p (rebase on top of it)
  4. Follow the on-screen instruction to resolve conflicts (check git status if you got lost).
  5. git push self push-purxoytpktpu --force-with-lease (update this PR)

You may also read Git Rebasing to Resolve Conflicts by Drew Blessing for a short tutorial.

Please avoid the "Resolve conflicts" button on GitHub. It uses git merge instead of git rebase which makes the PR commit history more difficult to read.

Sometimes step 4 will complete without asking for resolution. This is usually due to difference between how Cargo.lock conflict is handled during merge and rebase. This is normal, and you should still perform step 5 to update this PR.

Error message 

Auto-merging compiler/rustc_parse_format/src/lib.rs
Auto-merging compiler/rustc_parse_format/Cargo.toml
CONFLICT (content): Merge conflict in compiler/rustc_parse_format/Cargo.toml
Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result.

@Veykril

rustc_index is only used for its size assertion macro, so demote it to a dev-dependency gated under testing instead

@jieyouxu

@bors r=SparrowLii p=5 (conflict-prone)

@bors

📌 Commit 5950c86 has been approved by SparrowLii

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-author

Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author.

labels

Mar 23, 2025

@jieyouxu

@bors rollup (can be included in rollup)

jieyouxu added a commit to jieyouxu/rust that referenced this pull request

Mar 23, 2025

@jieyouxu

…owLii

Slim rustc_parse_format dependencies down

rustc_index is only used for its size assertion macro, so demote it to a dev-dependency gated under testing instead. This allows the crate to built without having to wait for syn (pulled in by rustc_index_macros)

Alternatively we could inline the macro, though from the looks of it that will run into trouble with rustc_randomized_layouts

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request

Mar 23, 2025

@bors

@bors

@bors

@github-actions GitHub Actions

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 60a3084 (parent) -> 97fc1f6 (this PR)

Test differences

No test diffs found

@rust-timer

Finished benchmarking commit (97fc1f6): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 774.048s -> 775.27s (0.16%)
Artifact size: 365.55 MiB -> 365.52 MiB (-0.01%)

@Veykril Veykril deleted the push-purxoytpktpu branch

March 23, 2025 14:22

Labels

merged-by-bors

This PR was explicitly merged by bors.

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.