Skip to content

compiletest: Make diagnostic kind mandatory on line annotations #862

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
1 of 3 tasks
petrochenkov opened this issue Apr 12, 2025 · 4 comments · Fixed by rust-lang/rust#139720
Closed
1 of 3 tasks

compiletest: Make diagnostic kind mandatory on line annotations #862

petrochenkov opened this issue Apr 12, 2025 · 4 comments · Fixed by rust-lang/rust#139720
Labels
major-change A proposal to make a major change to rustc major-change-accepted A major change proposal that was accepted T-compiler Add this label so rfcbot knows to poll the compiler team to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting

Comments

@petrochenkov
Copy link

Proposal

This is an MCP for PR rust-lang/rust#139720.

Compiletest currently accepts line annotations without kind in UI tests.

    let a = b + c; //~ my message

Such annotations have two effects.

  • First, they match any compiler-produced diagnostic kind. This functionality is never used in practice, there are no target-dependent diagnostic kinds of something like that.
  • Second, they are not "viral". For example, any explicit //~ NOTE my msg in a test requires all other NOTE diagnostics in the same test to be annotated. Implicit //~ my msg will just match the note and won't require other annotations.

The second functionality has a replacement since recently - directive //@ dont-require-annotations: NOTE.

The proposal is to remove support for //~ my message annotations and always require specifying the kind.
Unwanted additional annotations can be suppressed using the dont-require-annotations directive if necessary.

Mentors or Reviewers

@jieyouxu

Process

The main points of the Major Change Process are as follows:

  • File an issue describing the proposal.
  • A compiler team member or contributor who is knowledgeable in the area can second by writing @rustbot second.
    • Finding a "second" suffices for internal changes. If however, you are proposing a new public-facing feature, such as a -C flag, then full team check-off is required.
    • Compiler team members can initiate a check-off via @rfcbot fcp merge on either the MCP or the PR.
  • Once an MCP is seconded, the Final Comment Period begins. If no objections are raised after 10 days, the MCP is considered approved.

You can read more about Major Change Proposals on forge.
@petrochenkov petrochenkov added major-change A proposal to make a major change to rustc T-compiler Add this label so rfcbot knows to poll the compiler team labels Apr 12, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Apr 12, 2025

Important

This issue is not meant to be used for technical discussion. There is a Zulip stream for that.
Use this issue to leave procedural comments, such as volunteering to review, indicating that you second the proposal (or third, etc), or raising a concern that you would like to be addressed.

Concerns or objections can formally be registered here by adding a comment. 

@rfcbot concern reason-for-concern
<description of the concern>

Concerns can be lifted with:

@rfcbot resolve reason-for-concern

See documentation at https://forge.rust-lang.org

cc @rust-lang/compiler

@rustbot rustbot added the to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting label Apr 12, 2025
@petrochenkov petrochenkov mentioned this issue Apr 12, 2025
Merged
@oli-obk
Copy link
Contributor

oli-obk commented Apr 12, 2025

@rustbot second

@rustbot rustbot added the final-comment-period The FCP has started, most (if not all) team members are in agreement label Apr 12, 2025
@apiraino apiraino removed the to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting label Apr 17, 2025
@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

jieyouxu commented Apr 28, 2025 •
edited
Loading

This has been > 10 days and no concerns, so
@rustbot label: -final-comment-period +major-change-accepted

@rustbot

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@jieyouxu jieyouxu added the major-change-accepted A major change proposal that was accepted label Apr 28, 2025
@rustbot rustbot added the to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting label Apr 28, 2025
@jieyouxu jieyouxu added to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting and removed final-comment-period The FCP has started, most (if not all) team members are in agreement to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting labels Apr 28, 2025
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this issue Apr 29, 2025
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#139720 - petrochenkov:errkind2, r=jieyouxu
cb45107 
compiletest: Make diagnostic kind mandatory on line annotations (take 2)

Compiletest currently accepts line annotations without kind in UI tests.
```
    let a = b + c; //~ my message
```

Such annotations have two effects.
- First, they match any compiler-produced diagnostic kind. This functionality is never used in practice, there are no target-dependent diagnostic kinds of something like that.
- Second, they are not "viral". For example, any explicit `//~ NOTE my msg` in a test requires all other `NOTE` diagnostics in the same test to be annotated. Implicit `//~ my msg` will just match the note and won't require other annotations.

The second functionality has a replacement since recently - directive `//@ dont-require-annotations: NOTE`.

This PR removes support for `//~ my message` and makes the explicit diagnostic kind mandatory.
Unwanted additional annotations are suppressed using the `dont-require-annotations` directive.

Closes rust-lang/compiler-team#862.
Previous attempt - rust-lang#139427.
r? `@jieyouxu`
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this issue Apr 30, 2025
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#139720 - petrochenkov:errkind2, r=jieyouxu
d2eadb7 
compiletest: Make diagnostic kind mandatory on line annotations (take 2)

Compiletest currently accepts line annotations without kind in UI tests.
```
    let a = b + c; //~ my message
```

Such annotations have two effects.
- First, they match any compiler-produced diagnostic kind. This functionality is never used in practice, there are no target-dependent diagnostic kinds of something like that.
- Second, they are not "viral". For example, any explicit `//~ NOTE my msg` in a test requires all other `NOTE` diagnostics in the same test to be annotated. Implicit `//~ my msg` will just match the note and won't require other annotations.

The second functionality has a replacement since recently - directive `//@ dont-require-annotations: NOTE`.

This PR removes support for `//~ my message` and makes the explicit diagnostic kind mandatory.
Unwanted additional annotations are suppressed using the `dont-require-annotations` directive.

Closes rust-lang/compiler-team#862.
Previous attempt - rust-lang#139427.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
major-change A proposal to make a major change to rustc major-change-accepted A major change proposal that was accepted T-compiler Add this label so rfcbot knows to poll the compiler team to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

compiletest: Make diagnostic kind mandatory on line annotations (take 2) petrochenkov/rust
5 participants
@oli-obk @petrochenkov @apiraino @jieyouxu @rustbot