Add rusti/rustpkg to check-lite #7568
Closed
Conversation
This file contains 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
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 5, 2013
A lot of cross-platform issues stem from rusti/rustpkg, so include these two test suites in the 'check-lite' target which is run on the cross-compile bots. It shouldn't be much of a performance hit because these suites are pretty fast to run. Hopefully this will make snapshot/tarball creation easier in the future.
|
@alexcrichton this failed in mac's test_inherit_env, again. That test seems to fail more-or-less randomly, it should probably be removed |
Ironically also disable rusti tests for now, but mainly because they're awaiting LLVM upgrades before proceeding
|
@cmr, the second failure was legitimate, just the first failure was the test_inherit_env I've fixed the issue now, and also ironically disabled all rusti tests (as per the mailing list) |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2013
A lot of cross-platform issues stem from rusti/rustpkg, so include these two test suites in the 'check-lite' target which is run on the cross-compile bots. It shouldn't be much of a performance hit because these suites are pretty fast to run. Hopefully this will make snapshot/tarball creation easier in the future.
flip1995
pushed a commit
to flip1995/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 3, 2021
Downgrade option_if_let_else to nursery I believe that this lint's loose understanding of ownership (rust-lang#5822, rust-lang#6737) makes it unsuitable to be enabled by default in its current state, even as a pedantic lint. Additionally the lint has known problems with type inference (rust-lang#6137), though I may be willing to consider this a non-blocker in isolation if it weren't for the ownership false positives. A fourth false positive involving const fn: rust-lang#7567. But on top of these, for me the biggest issue is I basically fully agree with rust-lang/rust-clippy#6137 (comment). In my experience this lint universally makes code worse even when the resulting code does compile. --- changelog: remove [`option_if_let_else`] from default set of enabled lints
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
A lot of cross-platform issues stem from rusti/rustpkg, so include these two test suites in the 'check-lite' target which is run on the cross-compile bots. It shouldn't be much of a performance hit because these suites are pretty fast to run.
Hopefully this will make snapshot/tarball creation easier in the future.