-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 356
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
Rustup #2281
Rustup #2281
Conversation
@@ -75,7 +75,6 @@ LL | ABORT(); | |||
= note: inside `std::panicking::rust_panic_with_hook` at RUSTLIB/std/src/panicking.rs:LL:CC | |||
= note: inside closure at RUSTLIB/std/src/panicking.rs:LL:CC | |||
= note: inside `std::sys_common::backtrace::__rust_end_short_backtrace::<[closure@std::rt::begin_panic<&str>::{closure#0}], !>` at RUSTLIB/std/src/sys_common/backtrace.rs:LL:CC | |||
= note: inside `std::rt::begin_panic::<&str>` at RUSTLIB/std/src/panicking.rs:LL:CC |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We now prune a but more than before since we remove all #[caller_location]
frames, not just the ones at the top. IMO that makes sense. If it doesn't, we should also adjust the same in CTFE.
Cc @saethlin
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree this makes sense.
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit f389d46 has been approved by |
Rustup Fix our stacktrace after rust-lang/rust#98549. Now we can control whether `caller_location` should be pruned!
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
@bors r+ |
💡 This pull request was already approved, no need to approve it again.
|
📌 Commit f389d46 has been approved by |
@bors r+ |
📌 Commit 839c120 has been approved by |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Fix our stacktrace after rust-lang/rust#98549. Now we can control whether
caller_location
should be pruned!