Rollup of 7 pull requests #142558
Closed
Rollup of 7 pull requests #142558
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
rustc_std_internal_symbol is meant to call functions from crates where there is no direct dependency on said crate. As they either have to be added to symbols.o or rustc has to introduce an implicit dependency on them to avoid linker errors. The latter is done for some things like the panic runtime, but adding these symbols to symbols.o allows removing those implicit dependencies.
This used to be necessary for a correct linker order, but ever since the introduction of symbols.o adding the symbols in question to symbols.o would work just as well. We do still add dependencies on the panic runtime to the local crate, but not for #![needs_panic_runtime] crates. This also removes the runtime-depends-on-needs-runtime test. inject_dependency_if used to emit this error, but with symbols.o it is no longer important that there is no dependency and in fact it may be nice to have panic_abort and panic_unwind directly depend on libstd in the future for calling std::process::abort().
You shouldn't ever need to explicitly depend on it. And we weren't checking that the panic runtime used the correct panic strategy either.
There is already panic-unwind to enable it.
Signed-off-by: xizheyin <[email protected]>
…nner, r=tgross35 Get rid of `EscapeDebugInner`. I read the note on `EscapeDebugInner` and thought I'd give it a try.
…sleywiser,ibraheemdev Reduce special casing for the panic runtime See the individual commits for more info.
…r=ChrisDenton Implement send_signal for unix child processes Tracking issue: rust-lang#141975 There are two main differences between my implementation and the Public API section of the tracking issue. ~First, `send_signal` requires a mutable reference, like `Child::kill`.~ Second, `ChildExt` has `Sealed` as a supertrait, bringing it more in line with other extension traits like `CommandExt`.
…s, r=jdonszelmann Refactor `rustc_attr_data_structures` documentation I was reading through `AttributeKind` and realized that attributes like `InlineAttr` didn't appear in it, however, I found them in `rustc_codegen_ssa` and understood why (guessing). There's almost no overall documentation for this crate, I've added the organized documentation at the top of `lib.rs`, and I've grouped the Attributes into two categories: `AttributeKind` that run all through the compiler, and the ones that are only used in `codegen_ssa`, such as `InlineAttr`, `OptimizeAttr`, `InstructionSetAttr`. Also, I've added documentation for `AttributeKind` that further explains why attributes like `InlineAttr` don't appear in it, with examples for each variant. r? `@jdonszelmann`
…enton Stabilize "file_lock" feature Closes rust-lang#130994 r? `@joshtriplett`
…v, r=RalfJung clarify `rustc_do_not_const_check` comment ~~Given that we have used this attribute for other reasons before it seems appropriate to make this a "usually".~~ Add function name as a pointer cc `@rust-lang/wg-const-eval`
…q, r=compiler-errors use `if let` guards where possible these crates already enable the feature
rustbot
added
A-attributes
|
@bors r+ rollup=never p=5 |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2025
Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - #138237 (Get rid of `EscapeDebugInner`.) - #140809 (Reduce special casing for the panic runtime) - #141990 (Implement send_signal for unix child processes) - #142082 (Refactor `rustc_attr_data_structures` documentation) - #142125 (Stabilize "file_lock" feature) - #142528 (clarify `rustc_do_not_const_check` comment) - #142530 (use `if let` guards where possible) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
The job Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot) |
|
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-review
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.
Successful merges:
EscapeDebugInner. #138237 (Get rid ofEscapeDebugInner.)rustc_attr_data_structuresdocumentation #142082 (Refactorrustc_attr_data_structuresdocumentation)rustc_do_not_const_checkcomment #142528 (clarifyrustc_do_not_const_checkcomment)if letguards where possible #142530 (useif letguards where possible)r? @ghost
@rustbot modify labels: rollup
Create a similar rollup