Skip to content

Conversation

@lnicola
Copy link
Member

@lnicola lnicola commented Jul 25, 2024

Closes #17689

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jul 25, 2024
@lnicola lnicola marked this pull request as draft July 25, 2024 05:31
@lnicola lnicola force-pushed the unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn branch from 7f1c77b to 25f41e5 Compare July 25, 2024 05:38
@lnicola lnicola force-pushed the unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn branch from 25f41e5 to b392eb4 Compare July 25, 2024 05:41
@lnicola lnicola marked this pull request as ready for review July 25, 2024 05:41
CARGO_NET_RETRY: 10
CI: 1
RUST_BACKTRACE: short
RUSTFLAGS: "-D warnings -W unreachable-pub -W bare-trait-objects"
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These are warn by default, I don't think we need them here.

@lnicola
Copy link
Member Author

lnicola commented Jul 25, 2024

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 25, 2024

📌 Commit b392eb4 has been approved by lnicola

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 25, 2024

⌛ Testing commit b392eb4 with merge 62a7468...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jul 25, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: lnicola
Pushing 62a7468 to master...

@bors bors merged commit 62a7468 into rust-lang:master Jul 25, 2024
@lnicola lnicola deleted the unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn branch July 25, 2024 06:38

[workspace.lints.rust]
bare_trait_objects = "warn"
# remember to update RUSTFLAGS in ci.yml if you add something here
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wonder if we can make this work out better for CI 🤔

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We could just set them to deny, I don't think it's going to be too annoying.

I don't think we can customize them for specific profiles: https://users.rust-lang.org/t/changing-lint-configuration-based-on-cargo-profile/107286/2.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think it's going to be too annoying.

That will stop check early won't it? That will absolutely annoy me when refactoring because I don't fix all of those warnings immediately

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That depends on whether you're using --keep-going or not 😄.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Well no, because any dependency that errors (due to this) will prevent dependents from building still 😅 At least that is my understanding of --keep-going, it will make cargo no bail out on other independent work.

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

Labels

S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Enable and fix unsafe_op_in_unsafe_fn lint in rust-analyzer

4 participants