Remove "static item recursion checking" in favor of relying on cycle checks in the query engine by Zoxc · Pull Request #47987 · rust-lang/rust

Zoxc · 2018-02-03T20:18:47Z

Tests are changed to use the cycle check error message instead. Some duplicate tests are removed.

eddyb · 2018-02-03T21:53:21Z

LGTM. r? @nikomatsakis for rubber-stamping (in case there's some forgotten odd case here).

kennytm · 2018-02-04T07:32:25Z

Please update the documentation for E0265 "a static or constant references itself" in the error index.

Details

[01:41:47] failures:
[01:41:47] [01:41:47] ---- /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/error-index.md - Rust_Compiler_Error_Index::E0265 (line 4308) stdout ----
[01:41:47] error[E0391]: unsupported cyclic reference between types/traits detected
[01:41:47] --> /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/error-index.md:4309:16
[01:41:47] |
[01:41:47] 3 | const X: u32 = X;
[01:41:47] | ^ cyclic reference
[01:41:47] |
[01:41:47] note: the cycle begins when processing `main::X`...
[01:41:47] --> /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/error-index.md:4309:1
[01:41:47] |
[01:41:47] 3 | const X: u32 = X;
[01:41:47] | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[01:41:47] = note: ...which then again requires processing `main::X`, completing the cycle.
[01:41:47] [01:41:47] error: aborting due to previous error
[01:41:47] [01:41:47] thread 'rustc' panicked at 'Some expected error codes were not found: ["E0265"]', librustdoc/test.rs:303:9
[01:41:47] note: Run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` for a backtrace.
[01:41:47] [01:41:47] ---- /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/error-index.md - Rust_Compiler_Error_Index::E0265 (line 4312) stdout ----
[01:41:47] error[E0391]: unsupported cyclic reference between types/traits detected
[01:41:47] --> /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/error-index.md:4313:16
[01:41:47] |
[01:41:47] 3 | const X: u32 = Y;
[01:41:47] | ^ cyclic reference
[01:41:47] |
[01:41:47] note: the cycle begins when processing `main::Y`...
[01:41:47] --> /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/error-index.md:4314:1
[01:41:47] |
[01:41:47] 4 | const Y: u32 = X;
[01:41:47] | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[01:41:47] note: ...which then requires processing `main::X`...
[01:41:47] --> /checkout/obj/build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/test/error-index.md:4314:16
[01:41:47] |
[01:41:47] 4 | const Y: u32 = X;
[01:41:47] | ^
[01:41:47] = note: ...which then again requires processing `main::Y`, completing the cycle.
[01:41:47] [01:41:47] error: aborting due to previous error

oli-obk · 2018-02-05T07:42:35Z

I've been removing unused errors entirely before. Is there any reason not to do that?

Not sure, but E0001 and E0002 are being kept...

We're not consistent in doing this. I don't even like error codes at all.

I think we usually leave a tombstone. It doesn't matter so much for these older errors, but it's particularly useful if the error is the last one that was made, so that it doesn't get reused.

(I too would sort of like to reform error codes somewhat, though I'm not entirely sure to what.)

nikomatsakis

Looks nice

nikomatsakis · 2018-02-05T18:16:40Z

But I think we can remove this text, no?

nikomatsakis · 2018-02-05T18:17:35Z

seems like our message should include consts. Or maybe just change altogether. Something like "unsupported cyclic dependency detected"?

Sounds like a good idea

It's about time. Maybe not even "unsupported", that always seemed a bit unnecessary.

…checks in the query engine

Zoxc · 2018-02-10T05:00:19Z

I removed the unused error message and changed E0391 to say cyclic dependency detected.

eddyb · 2018-02-10T08:27:35Z

@bors r+

bors · 2018-02-10T08:27:36Z

📌 Commit 46a3f2f has been approved by eddyb

bors · 2018-02-18T11:49:56Z

⌛ Testing commit 46a3f2f with merge d6005b3f3e50013a47a4e5269389a1343bba48b3...

bors · 2018-02-18T14:51:12Z

💔 Test failed - status-appveyor

kennytm · 2018-02-18T16:26:02Z

@bors retry #46903

bors · 2018-02-18T23:47:29Z

⌛ Testing commit 46a3f2f with merge 7b6d35cc5bb9a8ff432d0a3e933359a68ed42130...

bors · 2018-02-18T23:54:14Z

💔 Test failed - status-travis

nikomatsakis · 2018-02-19T17:15:17Z

Looks spurious.... https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/jobs/343159659#L1009-L1010

kennytm · 2018-02-20T06:53:24Z

@bors retry

@eddyb

Remove "static item recursion checking" in favor of relying on cycle checks in the query engine Tests are changed to use the cycle check error message instead. Some duplicate tests are removed. r? @eddyb

Rollup of 15 pull requests - Successful merges: #47987, #48056, #48061, #48084, #48143, #48185, #48206, #48208, #48232, #48246, #48258, #48317, #48353, #48356, #48402 - Failed merges:

rust-highfive assigned eddyb Feb 3, 2018

rust-highfive assigned nikomatsakis and unassigned eddyb Feb 3, 2018

kennytm added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Feb 4, 2018

kennytm 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 4, 2018

Zoxc force-pushed the rm-recursion-checking branch from fa0385b to a868d49Compare February 4, 2018 13:46

oli-obk reviewed Feb 5, 2018
View reviewed changes

kennytm 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 5, 2018

nikomatsakis requested changes Feb 5, 2018
View reviewed changes

kennytm 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 5, 2018

Zoxc added 2 commits February 10, 2018 00:29

Remove "static item recursion checking" in favor of relying on cycle …
ae46434
…checks in the query engine

Change error message for E0391 to "cyclic dependency detected"
46a3f2f

Zoxc force-pushed the rm-recursion-checking branch from a868d49 to 46a3f2fCompare February 10, 2018 02:28

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 Feb 10, 2018

nikomatsakis approved these changes Feb 12, 2018
View reviewed changes

bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Feb 18, 2018

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 Feb 18, 2018

bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Feb 18, 2018

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 Feb 20, 2018

Manishearth mentioned this pull request Feb 24, 2018
Rollup of 15 pull requests #48510
Merged

bors merged commit 46a3f2f into rust-lang:masterFeb 24, 2018

Zoxc deleted the rm-recursion-checking branch March 3, 2018 06:38

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Conversation

Zoxc commented Feb 3, 2018

Uh oh!

eddyb commented Feb 3, 2018

Uh oh!

kennytm commented Feb 4, 2018

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nikomatsakis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Zoxc commented Feb 10, 2018

Uh oh!

eddyb commented Feb 10, 2018

Uh oh!

bors commented Feb 10, 2018

Uh oh!

bors commented Feb 18, 2018

Uh oh!

bors commented Feb 18, 2018

Uh oh!

kennytm commented Feb 18, 2018

Uh oh!

bors commented Feb 18, 2018

Uh oh!

bors commented Feb 18, 2018

Uh oh!

nikomatsakis commented Feb 19, 2018

Uh oh!

kennytm commented Feb 20, 2018

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants