Rollup of 7 pull requests #89172
Closed
Rollup of 7 pull requests #89172
Conversation
This file contains 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
Duration's Debug formatting previously ignored the width parameter. This commit fixes that. Fixes issue rust-lang#88059.
Signed-off-by: Yilin Chen <sticnarf@gmail.com>
This test required a newer version of cdb than was previously enabled in CI thus leading to some bitrot in the test since the time it was originally created. With the update to the `windows-latest` image last week, we're now running this test in CI and thus uncovered the regression. I've updated the test and it now passes.
It turned out to cause (minor) perf regressions.
Make `Duration` respect `width` when formatting using `Debug` When printing or writing a `std::time::Duration` using `Debug` formatting, it previously completely ignored any specified `width`. This is unlike types like integers and floats, which do pad to `width`, for both `Display` and `Debug`, though not all types consider `width` in their `Debug` output (see e.g. rust-lang#30164). Curiously, `Duration`'s `Debug` formatting *did* consider `precision`. This PR makes `Duration` pad to `width` just like integers and floats, so that ```rust format!("|{:8?}|", Duration::from_millis(1234)) ``` returns ``` |1.234s | ``` Before you ask "who formats `Debug` output?", note that `Duration` doesn't actually implement `Display`, so `Debug` is currently the only way to format `Duration`s. I think that's wrong, and `Duration` should get a `Display` implementation, but in the meantime there's no harm in making the `Debug` formatting respect `width` rather than ignore it. I chose the default alignment to be left-aligned. The general rule Rust uses is: numeric types are right-aligned by default, non-numeric types left-aligned. It wasn't clear to me whether `Duration` is a numeric type or not. The fact that a formatted `Duration` can end with suffixes of variable length (`"s"`, `"ms"`, `"µs"`, etc.) made me lean towards left-alignment, but it would be trivial to change it. Fixes issue rust-lang#88059.
Fix missing `no_global_oom_handling` cfg-gating Cfg-gate these trait impls that are neglected. These functions compile now because they use `box` syntax which depends on `exchange_malloc` during codegen only; as a result they compiles with cfg `no_global_oom_handling` but shouldn't. Discovered in rust-lang#89030 because that PR makes `box` syntax depend on `exchange_malloc` lang item during MIR construction.
…nagisa Work around invalid DWARF bugs for fat LTO This PR applies the same workaround in rust-lang#46772 to fat LTO. It seems to fix the bug reported in rust-lang#66118 (comment).
"Fix" an overflow in byte position math r? `@estebank` help! I fixed the ICE only to brick the diagnostic. I mean, it was wrong previously (using an already expanded macro span), but it is really bad now XD
…o_test, r=ehuss Re-enable the `src/test/debuginfo/mutex.rs` test on Windows This test required a newer version of cdb than was previously enabled in CI thus leading to some bitrot in the test since the time it was originally created. With the update to the `windows-latest` image last week, we're now running this test in CI and thus uncovered the regression. I've updated the test and it now passes. r? `@ehuss`
…GuillaumeGomez Revert the rustdoc box syntax removal Reverts the rustdoc box syntax removal from rust-lang#87781. It turned out to cause (minor) perf regressions. Requested in rust-lang#87781 (comment)
…n514 Document `--show-type-layout` in the rustdoc book I also made a few small, related changes as separate commits. r? `@jyn514`
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=7 |
|
📌 Commit c9a066d has been approved by |
bors
added
the
S-waiting-on-bors
|
#89134 is revert for perf regression, maybe not in rollup? |
|
⌛ Testing commit c9a066d with merge f60f786b12477cf109f8e5a9e61485c98649af21... |
|
Ugh, good point. @bors cancel |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
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.
Successful merges:
Durationrespectwidthwhen formatting usingDebug#88999 (MakeDurationrespectwidthwhen formatting usingDebug)no_global_oom_handlingcfg-gating #89036 (Fix missingno_global_oom_handlingcfg-gating)src/test/debuginfo/mutex.rstest on Windows #89127 (Re-enable thesrc/test/debuginfo/mutex.rstest on Windows)--show-type-layoutin the rustdoc book #89164 (Document--show-type-layoutin the rustdoc book)Failed merges:
r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup