Implement `core::ptr::Unique` on top of `NonNull` by eduardosm · Pull Request #9...

Copy link

Contributor

rust-highfive commented 9 days ago

Hey! It looks like you've submitted a new PR for the library teams!

If this PR contains changes to any rust-lang/rust public library APIs then please comment with r? rust-lang/libs-api @rustbot label +T-libs-api to request review from a libs-api team reviewer. If you're unsure where your change falls no worries, just leave it as is and the reviewer will take a look and make a decision to forward on if necessary.

Examples of T-libs-api changes:

• a stabilization of a library feature
• introducing new or changes existing unstable library APIs
• changes to public documentation in ways that create new stability guarantees

rust-highfive commented 9 days ago

r? @thomcc

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

This comment has been hidden.

tmiasko commented 9 days ago

You probably need to change the code generation by adding one additional extract_field / project_field when dereferencing a box (those correspond to the first field Box, the first field of Unique, and now in addition to that the first field of NonNull):

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

eduardosm commented 9 days ago

You probably need to change the code generation by adding one additional extract_field / project_field when dereferencing a box (those correspond to the first field Box, the first field of Unique, and now in addition to that the first field of NonNull):

Thanks for the tip

This comment has been hidden.

thomcc commented 9 days ago

Hmm, yeah, never really did understand what the deal with Unique was, so I'm gonna to punt this to someone else. Naïvely, it looks fine.

r? rust-lang/libs

m-ou-se commented 9 days ago

@bors r+

bors commented 9 days ago

Commit a22a9a9 has been approved by m-ou-se

tmiasko commented 8 days ago

FYI: @antoyo, @bjorn3 this pull request modifies Box, in case mini_core or other backends need matching changes.

eduardosm commented 8 days ago

Can we run MSVC CI on this PR to test CDB without waiting for rollup?

m-ou-se commented 8 days ago •

Can we run MSVC CI on this PR to test CDB without waiting for rollup?

It's possible, but there's no bot command or something to do that. You'd have to temporarily modify src/ci/github-actions/ci.yml in this PR to include that test runner in the ones that run on PRs. (And run ./x.py run src/tools/expand-yaml-anchors/ to update .github/workflows/ci.yml.)

eduardosm commented 8 days ago

MSVC tests have finally passed, reverted PR CI changes

klensy commented 8 days ago

MSVC tests have finally passed, reverted PR CI changes

You can squash commits a little, instead of having unrelated ones in history.

eduardosm commented 8 days ago

You can squash commits a little, instead of having unrelated ones in history.

eduardosm commented 7 days ago

@rustbot label -S-waiting-on-bors +S-waiting-on-review

tmiasko commented 6 days ago

@bors r=m-ou-se,tmiasko rollup=never

bors commented 6 days ago

Commit 7ba0292 has been approved by m-ou-se,tmiasko

bors commented 6 days ago

Testing commit 7ba0292 with merge ac8b118...

bors commented 5 days ago

Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: m-ou-se,tmiasko
Pushing ac8b118 to master...

rust-timer commented 5 days ago

Finished benchmarking commit (ac8b118): comparison url.

Summary:

• Primary benchmarks: relevant regressions found
• Secondary benchmarks: mixed results

Regressions
(primary) Regressions
(secondary) Improvements
(primary) Improvements
(secondary) All
(primary)

count1 20 10 0 6 20

mean2 0.6% 1.3% N/A -0.4% 0.6%

max 1.2% 2.5% N/A -0.5% 1.2%

If you disagree with this performance assessment, please file an issue in rust-lang/rustc-perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please open an issue or create a new PR that fixes the regressions, add a comment linking to the newly created issue or PR, and then add the perf-regression-triaged label to this PR.

@rustbot label: +perf-regression

Footnotes

1. number of relevant changes

2. the arithmetic mean of the percent change

pnkfelix commented 2 days ago

• This seems like it introduced a regression into the compilation times for a lot of important crates.
• I'm not clear on what its buying us, it seems like internal code cleanup? That doesn't justify a >=1% compile-time regression to webrender and syn.

@eduardosm or @m-ou-se , do either of you have time to look into the cause of this? I'm tempted to suggest we revert it, unless someone can present an argument for why we need it.

pnkfelix commented 2 days ago

nominating for attention from T-libs, in the hopes that someone can address my concerns above.