Skip to content

doc: Un-ignore lots of guide-ffi tests #13459

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.

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

Closed

Conversation

alexcrichton
Copy link
Member

Using some strategically-placed # markers most of the examples are testable
(and their contents are nontrivial).

Closes #13445

Using some strategically-placed `#` markers most of the examples are testable
(and their contents are nontrivial).

Closes rust-lang#13445
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 12, 2014
Using some strategically-placed `#` markers most of the examples are testable
(and their contents are nontrivial).

Closes #13445
@bors bors closed this Apr 12, 2014
@alexcrichton alexcrichton deleted the stop-ignoring-ffi branch April 13, 2014 17:19
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 9, 2023
Mega-sync from `rust-lang/rust`

This essentially implements `@oli-obk's` suggestion here rust-lang/rust-analyzer#13459 (comment), with `@eddyb's` help.

This PR is equivalent to 14 syncs (back and forth) between `rust-lang/rust` and `rust-lang/rust-analyzer`.

Working from this list (from bottom to top):

```
(x) a2a1d99 ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 79923c3 ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) c60b1f6 ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 8807fc4 ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) a99a48e ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 4f55ebb ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) f5fde4d ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 459bbb4 ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 65e1dc4 ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 3e358a6 ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 31519bb ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 8231fee ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 22c8c9c ⬆️ rust-analyzer
(x) 9d2cb42 ⬆️ rust-analyzer
```

(This listed was assembled by doing a `git subtree push`, which made a branch, and looking at the new commits in that branch, picking only those that were `⬆️ rust-analyzer` commits)

We used the following commands to simulate merges in both directions:

```shell
TO_MERGE=22c8c9c40 # taken from the list above, bottom to top
git merge --no-edit --no-ff $TO_MERGE
git merge --no-edit --no-ff $(git -C ../rust log --pretty=format:'%cN | %s | %ad => %P' | rg -m1 -F "$(git show --no-patch --pretty=format:%ad $TO_MERGE)" | tee /dev/stderr | rg '.* => \S+ (\S+)$' --replace '$1')
```

We encountered no merge conflicts that Git wasn't able to solve by doing it this way.

Here's what the commit graph looks like (as shown in the Git Lens VSCode extension):

<img width="1345" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/7998310/203984523-7c1a690a-8224-416c-8015-ed6e49667066.png">

This PR closes rust-lang#13459

## Does this unbreak `rust->ra` syncs?

Yes, here's how we tried:

In `rust-analyzer`:

  * check out `subtree-fix` (this PR's branch)
  * make a new branch off of it: `git checkout -b subtree-fix-merge-test`
  * simulate this PR getting merged with `git merge master`

In `rust`:

  * pull latest master
  * make a new branch: `git checkout -b test-change`
  * mess with rust-analyzer (I added a comment to `src/tools/rust-analyzer/Cargo.toml`)
  * commit
  * run `git subtree push -P src/tools/rust-analyzer ra-local final-sync` (this follows the [Clippy sync guide](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/clippy/development/infrastructure/sync.html))

This created a `final-sync` branch in `rust-analyzer`.

In `rust-analyzer`:

  * `git merge --no-ff final-sync` (this follows the [Clippy sync guide](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/clippy/development/infrastructure/sync.html))

Now `git log` in `rust-analyzer` shows this:

```
commit 460128387e46ddfc2b95921b2d7f6e913a3d2b9f (HEAD -> subtree-fix-merge-test)
Merge: 0513fc02a 9ce6a734f
Author: Amos Wenger <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri Nov 25 13:28:24 2022 +0100

    Merge branch 'final-sync' into subtree-fix-merge-test

commit 0513fc02a08ea9de952983624bd0a00e98044b36
Merge: 38c98d1 6918009
Author: Amos Wenger <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri Nov 25 13:28:02 2022 +0100

    Merge branch 'master' into subtree-fix-merge-test

commit 9ce6a734f37ef8e53689f1c6f427a9efafe846bd (final-sync)
Author: Amos Wenger <[email protected]>
Date:   Fri Nov 25 13:26:26 2022 +0100

    Mess with rust-analyzer just for fun
```

And `git diff 0513fc02a08ea9de952983624bd0a00e98044b36` shows this:

```patch
diff --git a/Cargo.toml b/Cargo.toml
index 286ef1e..c9e24cd19 100644
--- a/Cargo.toml
+++ b/Cargo.toml
`@@` -32,3 +32,5 `@@` debug = 0
 # ungrammar = { path = "../ungrammar" }

 # salsa = { path = "../salsa" }
+
+# lol, hi
```

## Does this unbreak `ra->rust` syncs?

Yes, here's how we tried.

From `rust`:

  * `git checkout -b sync-from-ra`
  * `git subtree pull -P src/tools/rust-analyzer ra-local subtree-fix-merge-test` (this is adapted from the [Clippy sync guide](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/clippy/development/infrastructure/sync.html#performing-the-sync-from-clippy-to-rust-langrust), you would normally use `ra-upstream master` but we're simulating things here)

A commit editor pops up, there was no merge conflicts.

## How do we prevent this from happening again?

Like `@bjorn3` said in rust-lang/rust-analyzer#13459 (comment)

> Whenever syncing from rust-analyzer -> rust you have to immediately sync the merge commit from rust -> rust-analyzer to prevent merge conflicts in the future.

But if we get it wrong again, at least now we have a not-so-painful way to fix it.
flip1995 pushed a commit to flip1995/rust that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2024
`zombie_processes`: consider `wait()` calls in nested bodies

Fixes rust-lang#13459

Small oversight. We weren't considering uses of the local in closures.

changelog: none
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Change old documentation that uses deprecated "do" syntax
2 participants