bump mdbook to 0.1.5 #96
Merged
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
|
Looks like it does |
jieyouxu
pushed a commit
to jieyouxu/rustc-dev-guide
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2025
handle precompiled compiler more properly Fixes the build cycle problem reported on [#t-infra/bootstrap > Cycle on &rust-lang#96;aarch64-apple&rust-lang#96;](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/326414-t-infra.2Fbootstrap/topic/Cycle.20on.20.60aarch64-apple.60/with/504231609).
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 19, 2025
Introduce and use specialized `//@ ignore-auxiliary` for test support files instead of using `//@ ignore-test` ### Summary Add a semantically meaningful directive for ignoring test *auxiliary* files. This is for auxiliary files that *participate* in actual tests but should not be built by `compiletest` (i.e. these files are involved through `mod xxx;` or `include!()` or `#[path = "xxx"]`, etc.). ### Motivation A specialized directive like `//@ ignore-auxiliary` makes it way easier to audit disabled tests via `//@ ignore-test`. - These support files cannot use the canonical `auxiliary/` dir because they participate in module resolution or are included, or their relative paths can be important for test intention otherwise. Follow-up to: - #139705 - #139783 - #139740 See also discussions in: - [#t-compiler > Directive name for non-test aux files?](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/Directive.20name.20for.20non-test.20aux.20files.3F/with/512773817) - [#t-compiler > Handling disabled `//@ ignore-test` tests](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/Handling.20disabled.20.60.2F.2F.40.20ignore-test.60.20tests/with/512005974) - [#t-compiler/meetings > [steering] 2025-04-11 Dealing with disabled tests](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/238009-t-compiler.2Fmeetings/topic/.5Bsteering.5D.202025-04-11.20Dealing.20with.20disabled.20tests/with/511717981) ### Remarks on remaining unconditionally disabled tests under `tests/` After this PR, against commit 79a272c6402, only **14** remaining test files are disabled through `//@ ignore-test`: <details> <summary>Remaining `//@ ignore-test` files under `tests/`</summary> ``` tests/debuginfo/drop-locations.rs 4://@ ignore-test (broken, see #128971) tests/rustdoc/macro-document-private-duplicate.rs 1://@ ignore-test (fails spuriously, see issue #89228) tests/rustdoc/inline_cross/assoc-const-equality.rs 3://@ ignore-test (FIXME: #125092) tests/ui/match/issue-27021.rs 7://@ ignore-test (#54987) tests/ui/match/issue-26996.rs 7://@ ignore-test (#54987) tests/ui/issues/issue-49298.rs 9://@ ignore-test (#54987) tests/ui/issues/issue-59756.rs 2://@ ignore-test (rustfix needs multiple suggestions) tests/ui/precondition-checks/write.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/precondition-checks/read.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/precondition-checks/write_bytes.rs 5://@ ignore-test (unimplemented) tests/ui/explicit-tail-calls/drop-order.rs 2://@ ignore-test: tail calls are not implemented in rustc_codegen_ssa yet, so this causes 🧊 tests/ui/panics/panic-short-backtrace-windows-x86_64.rs 3://@ ignore-test (#92000) tests/ui/json/json-bom-plus-crlf-multifile-aux.rs 3://@ ignore-test Not a test. Used by other tests tests/ui/traits/next-solver/object-soundness-requires-generalization.rs 2://@ ignore-test (see #114196) ``` </details> Of these, most are either **unimplemented**, or **spurious**, or **known-broken**. The outstanding one is `tests/ui/json/json-bom-plus-crlf-multifile-aux.rs` which I did not want to touch in *this* PR -- that aux file has load-bearing BOM and carriage returns and byte offset matters. I think those test files that require special encoding / BOM probably are better off as `run-make` tests. See #139968 for that aux file. ### Review advice - Best reviewed commit-by-commit. - The directive name diverged from the most voted `//@ auxiliary` because I think that's easy to confuse with `//@ aux-{crate,dir}`. r? compiler
Kobzol
pushed a commit
to Kobzol/rustc-dev-guide
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 4, 2025
…ss35
Always use the pure Rust fallback instead of `llvm.{maximum,minimum}`
While llvm/llvm-project#142170 was merged, it was reverted and next attempt (llvm/llvm-project#140193) at fixing the LLVM implementation seems to have stall, so let's reverted back to pure Rust with the LLVM codegen.
cc [#t-compiler/llvm > &rust-lang#96;llvm.minimum&rust-lang#96;/&rust-lang#96;llvm.maximum&rust-lang#96; issues @ 💬](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/187780-t-compiler.2Fllvm/topic/.60llvm.2Eminimum.60.2F.60llvm.2Emaximum.60.20issues/near/527044712)
Fixes rust-lang/rust#141087
r? `@tgross35`
github-actions bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2025
Drop `./x suggest` This PR removes the current `./x suggest` implementation (rust-lang/rust#109933, rust-lang/rust#106249) and associated docs for several reasons: 1. Primarily, `./x suggest` is another "flow" in bootstrap that incurs extra complexity and more invariants that bootstrap has to maintain. This causes more friction when trying to investigate and fix staging problems. As far as I know, this flow has not been actively maintained in quite a while, and I'm not aware of interest in maintaining it. Bootstrap really could use less implementation complexity with a very limited maintenance bandwidth. 2. The current `./x suggest` implementation "bypasses" the usual stage defaults for the various check/build/test/etc. flows, and it's not really possible to have a stage default because `./x suggest --run` produces a *sequence* of suggestions like [`./x check`, `./x test library/std`, ..] and then tries to run all of them in sequence, based on which files are modified. 3. We've not seen a lot of interest both in using it or extending static/dynamic test suggestions. Last extensions were rust-lang/rust#117961 and rust-lang/rust#120763. I'm not convinced the extra implementation complexity is worth it. This was discussed in: - [#t-infra/bootstrap > Dropping the current `./x suggest` flow implementation](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/326414-t-infra.2Fbootstrap/topic/Dropping.20the.20current.20.60.2E.2Fx.20suggest.60.20flow.20implementation/with/527456699) - [#t-compiler > Dropping current `./x suggest` implementation](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/channel/131828-t-compiler/topic/Dropping.20current.20.60.2E.2Fx.20suggest.60.20implementation/with/527528696) Closes rust-lang/rust#109933 (the current implementation is being removed). Closes rust-lang/rust#143569 (by removing `./x suggest` altogether).
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hoping this will fix travis.