add rustc lint, warning when iterating over hashmaps 2 by lcnr · Pull Request #9...
source link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/92584
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
New issue
add rustc lint, warning when iterating over hashmaps 2 #92584
Conversation
Awaiting bors try build completion.
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf
Trying commit This comment has been hidden.
Awaiting bors try build completion.
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf
Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: ad47090 (ad47090cb5e41b11dcd8682dee0cacc33b2e9903)
Finished benchmarking commit (ad47090): comparison url.
Summary: This change led to very large relevant regressions 
in compiler performance.
- Very large regression in instruction counts (up to 10.4% on
incr-fullbuilds ofdeeply-nested-async)
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.
Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR led to changes in compiler perf.
Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.
@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression
Awaiting bors try build completion.
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf
This comment has been hidden.
Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: f595a08 (f595a08cba4963a2575a9e38727108c748031450)
Finished benchmarking commit (f595a08): comparison url.
Summary: This change led to very large relevant regressions in compiler performance.
- Very large regression in instruction counts (up to 10.4% on
incr-fullbuilds ofdeeply-nested-async)
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.
Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR led to changes in compiler perf.
Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.
@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression
Awaiting bors try build completion.
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-perf
Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 5d17beb (5d17beb959299ea0fbd2279075b7f0746ad7f886)
Finished benchmarking commit (5d17beb): comparison url.
Summary: This benchmark run did not return any relevant changes.
If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.
Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR led to changes in compiler perf.
@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: +S-waiting-on-review -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression
should now be ready for review/merged again
r=me after addressing the blanket import.
compiler/rustc_lint/src/internal.rs
Outdated Show resolved
// FIXME(rustdoc): This lint uses typecheck results, causing rustdoc to
// error if there are resolution failures.
//
// As internal lints are currently always run if there are `unstable_options`,
// they are added to the lint store of rustdoc. Internal lints are also
// not used via the `lint_mod` query. Crate lints run outside of a query
// so rustdoc currently doesn't disable them.
//
// Instead of relying on this, either change crate lints to a query disabled by
// rustdoc, only run internal lints if the user is explicitly opting in
// or figure out a different way to avoid running lints for rustdoc.
if cx.tcx.sess.opts.actually_rustdoc {
return;
}
Do any other lints have to deal with this?
not sure, rustdoc disables the late lint query and afaik pretty much runs no lints outside of the internal lints (which we run because we always add them to the lint store if -Zunstable-options is set)
and no other internal lint uses the typeck query which is what is causing rustdoc to error
@bors r=estebank rollup
Commit 4bbe970 has been approved by estebank
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK