Skip to content

Make missing_fragment_specifier an unconditional error#128425

Merged
bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
tgross35:missing-fragment-specifier-unconditional
Jun 13, 2025
Merged

Make missing_fragment_specifier an unconditional error#128425
bors merged 2 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
tgross35:missing-fragment-specifier-unconditional

Conversation

@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor

@tgross35 tgross35 commented Jul 31, 2024

This was attempted in 1 then reverted in 2 because of fallout. Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in 3.

Make missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again, across all editions.

More context: #128006
Most recent crater: #128425 (comment)
Fixes: #40107

r? @petrochenkov

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Jul 31, 2024
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@tgross35 tgross35 force-pushed the missing-fragment-specifier-unconditional branch 2 times, most recently from 392a2c7 to c2492ec Compare July 31, 2024 06:14
@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor Author

This is just to test the diagnostics, none of the possible code cleanup is included.

@petrochenkov please take a look when you get the chance and start crater if the change seems correct.

@bors try

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Jul 31, 2024
…unconditional, r=<try>

[crater] Make `missing_fragment_specifier` an unconditional error

This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout. Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3].

Experiment with turning missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again.

More context: rust-lang#128006

[1]: rust-lang#75516
[2]: rust-lang#80210
[3]: rust-lang#128006
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 31, 2024

⌛ Trying commit c2492ec with merge 063c08d...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jul 31, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 063c08d (063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c)

@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

@craterbot check

@craterbot
Copy link
Collaborator

👌 Experiment pr-128425 created and queued.
🤖 Automatically detected try build 063c08d
🔍 You can check out the queue and this experiment's details.

ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

@craterbot craterbot added S-waiting-on-crater Status: Waiting on a crater run to be completed. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jul 31, 2024
@craterbot
Copy link
Collaborator

🚧 Experiment pr-128425 is now running

ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

@craterbot
Copy link
Collaborator

🎉 Experiment pr-128425 is completed!
📊 156 regressed and 2 fixed (487733 total)
📰 Open the full report.

⚠️ If you notice any spurious failure please add them to the blacklist!
ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more

@craterbot craterbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-crater Status: Waiting on a crater run to be completed. labels Aug 11, 2024
@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor Author

tgross35 commented Aug 14, 2024

rg 'missing fragment specifier' -l --stats in the logs reports 373 matches. The previous attempt in 2020 had 475 regressions per #76605, so that is slight improvement but not much.

Like the previous run, almost all of these (361) come from clap <= 2.20, based on a crude rg 'missing fragment specifier.*\n.*clap' -l --stats -U. Remaining 12:

build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/master#83dcdb3a5dad0ed1e3e1fadc848d3f7727b41aa5.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:121:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/master#83dcdb3a5dad0ed1e3e1fadc848d3f7727b41aa5.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:136:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/master#83dcdb3a5dad0ed1e3e1fadc848d3f7727b41aa5.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:121:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/master#83dcdb3a5dad0ed1e3e1fadc848d3f7727b41aa5.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:136:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/try#063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:121:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/try#063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:136:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/try#063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:121:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/try#063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:136:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/try#063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:121:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/try#063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:121:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/try#063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:136:17
build-fail/reg/sem/0.1.0/try#063c08dd8db6ff113bb809c130456f1781abe72c.txt-[INFO] [stdout]    --> src/macros.rs:136:17

We could let this simmer for a while with the new error in deps level (#128122) and/or the edition-dependent lint (#128006). I don't really know how to feel about these results because all of the relevant clap versions have been yanked for ~4 years, per clap-rs/clap#2076.

Requesting compiler feedback for how to proceed. Context: this was made an e2024 error in #128006, making it an error in all editions is being considered here.

@rustbot label +I-compiler-nominated

@rustbot rustbot added the I-compiler-nominated Nominated for discussion during a compiler team meeting. label Aug 14, 2024
@petrochenkov petrochenkov added S-waiting-on-team and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 14, 2024
@wesleywiser
Copy link
Member

Discussed briefly in the compiler team triage meeting. Given that nearly all regressions are on very old versions of clap and this has been a compatibility warning since 2017, we think it's reasonable to make this an unconditional error.

@apiraino apiraino removed the I-compiler-nominated Nominated for discussion during a compiler team meeting. label Aug 15, 2024
@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for discussing this. I'll wait for the next beta branch so #128122 is on stable for at least a cycle, then continue pushing this forward.

@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor Author

To reflect my above comment

@rustbot blocked

@rustbot rustbot added the S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. label Aug 19, 2024
@apiraino apiraino removed the to-announce Announce this issue on triage meeting label Jun 5, 2025
@tgross35 tgross35 force-pushed the missing-fragment-specifier-unconditional branch from 5f0c38d to ed21403 Compare June 9, 2025 23:44
@rustbot rustbot added the T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output. label Jun 9, 2025
tgross35 added a commit to tgross35/saveoursecrets-sdk that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2025
This lint is `allow`ed in a few places where it doesn't seem to be
needed. The `missing_fragment_specifier` lint will be going away in a
future version of Rust and replaced with a hard error [1], so update
this now to avoid a future `unknown_lints` warning.

[1]: rust-lang/rust#128425
@tgross35 tgross35 force-pushed the missing-fragment-specifier-unconditional branch from ed21403 to 5999782 Compare June 10, 2025 00:08
@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor Author

Finally rebased this, I needed to do a few test updates.

@rustbot ready

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Jun 10, 2025
@petrochenkov
Copy link
Contributor

There's a list of removed lints in compiler\rustc_lint\src\lib.rs.
r=me after adding missing_fragment_specifier to that list (formally approved in #128425 (comment)).
@rustbot author

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 10, 2025
@tgross35 tgross35 force-pushed the missing-fragment-specifier-unconditional branch from 5999782 to 1dc388b Compare June 10, 2025 18:17
@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 10, 2025

📌 Commit 1dc388b has been approved by petrochenkov,traviscross

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 12, 2025

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #142392) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

tgross35 added 2 commits June 12, 2025 07:35
This was attempted in [1] then reverted in [2] because of fallout.
Recently, this was made an edition-dependent error in [3].

Make missing fragment specifiers an unconditional error again.

[1]: rust-lang#75516
[2]: rust-lang#80210
[3]: rust-lang#128006
@tgross35
Copy link
Contributor Author

Resolved conflicts.

@bors r=petrochenkov,traviscross

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Jun 12, 2025

📌 Commit 841f7ce has been approved by petrochenkov,traviscross

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@Kobzol
Copy link
Member

Kobzol commented Jun 17, 2025

@rust-timer build 21dbb46

(Testing #142443)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (21dbb46): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
0.1% [0.1%, 0.1%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 1.8%, secondary 2.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
1.8% [1.8%, 1.8%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.0% [1.6%, 2.4%] 2
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.8% [1.8%, 1.8%] 1

Cycles

Results (secondary 1.8%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
5.4% [5.4%, 5.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.8% [-1.8%, -1.8%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

Results (secondary -0.0%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.0% [-0.0%, -0.0%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Bootstrap: 755.964s -> 690.641s (-8.64%)
Artifact size: 372.26 MiB -> 372.25 MiB (-0.00%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

C-crater Category: Issue for tracking crater runs disposition-merge This issue / PR is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it. finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this PR / Issue. I-lang-radar Items that are on lang's radar and will need eventual work or consideration. needs-fcp This change is insta-stable, or significant enough to need a team FCP to proceed. relnotes Marks issues that should be documented in the release notes of the next release. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-lang Relevant to the language team T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Tracking issue for future-incompatibility lint missing_fragment_specifier