Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
build_helper: try less confusing method names - #63196
Merged
Merged
Conversation
RalfJung
commented
Aug 1, 2019
| let src = builder.src.join("src/doc/rustc-guide"); | ||
| let mut rustbook_cmd = builder.tool_cmd(Tool::Rustbook); | ||
| try_run_quiet(builder, rustbook_cmd.arg("linkcheck").arg(&src)); | ||
| try_run(builder, rustbook_cmd.arg("linkcheck").arg(&src)); |
MemberAuthor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change is based on this thread: I think we actually want to see the output here.
The only other user of try_run_quiet uses logic of the kind
if builder.config.verbose_tests{try_run(builder,&mut cmd)}else{try_run_quiet(builder,&mut cmd)}Most tools just use try_run.
alexcrichton
commented
Aug 2, 2019
Member
@bors: r+ Sounds reasonable to me! |
bors
commented
Aug 2, 2019
Collaborator
📌 Commit 30f61de has been approved by |
Centril added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2019
build_helper: try less confusing method names build_helper's `*_silent` methods were likely called that way because they do not print the command being run to stdout. [In the original file this all makes sense](rust-lang@046e687#diff-5c3d6537a43ecae03014e118a7fe3321). But later it also gained `*_suppressed` methods and the difference between `silent` and `suppressed` is far from clear. So rename `run` (which prints the command being run) to `run_verbose`. Then we can call the methods that just run a command and show its output but nothing extra `run` and `try_run`. `run_verbose` (formerly `run`) is unused from what I can tell. Should I remove it? r? @alexcrichton Cc @Mark-Simulacrum Also see rust-lang#63089 (comment).
bors added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 2, 2019
Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - #63107 (Added support for armv7-unknown-linux-gnueabi/musleabi) - #63121 (On `format!()` arg count mismatch provide extra info) - #63196 (build_helper: try less confusing method names) - #63206 (remove unsupported test case) - #63208 (Round generator sizes to a multiple of their alignment) - #63212 (Pretty print attributes in `print_arg`) - #63215 (Clarify semantics of mem::zeroed) Failed merges: r? @ghost
bors
commented
Aug 3, 2019
Collaborator
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #63228) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
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
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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.
build_helper's
*_silentmethods were likely called that way because they do not print the command being run to stdout. In the original file this all makes sense. But later it also gained*_suppressedmethods and the difference betweensilentandsuppressedis far from clear.So rename
run(which prints the command being run) torun_verbose. Then we can call the methods that just run a command and show its output but nothing extrarunandtry_run.run_verbose(formerlyrun) is unused from what I can tell. Should I remove it?r? @alexcrichton
Cc @Mark-Simulacrum
Also see #63089 (comment).