Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reapply stabilisation of the #[coverage(..)] attribute #134942

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

clarfonthey
Copy link
Contributor

@clarfonthey clarfonthey commented Dec 30, 2024

This reverts the revert (#134672) of the original stabilisation (#130766) so it can be merged with a proper FCP (and not the one in the tracking issue, #84605).

The original reference PR rust-lang/reference#1628 can be reapplied after this is merged.

r? lang

…-attribute, r=wesleywiser"

This reverts commit 87c2f9a.
@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. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Dec 30, 2024
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 30, 2024

Some changes occurred in coverage tests.

cc @Zalathar

rust-analyzer is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/rust-analyzer instead.

cc @rust-lang/rust-analyzer

@jieyouxu
Copy link
Member

Please also see #134749 for unresolved questions; this stabilization should receive an implementation sufficiency check from T-compiler as well.

@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

compiler-errors commented Dec 31, 2024

Hm. The comment in #84605 (comment) specifically mentions "so you would open a stabilization PR, when ready, and nominate that for us." (emphasis mine).

#134749 lists quite a few steps that the de-facto feature owner would like to see done before stabilization, and the description doesn't really mention any of that, so I feel like putting up a stabilization PR so soon is jumping the gun a bit?

I'm at least making this comment to cross-link it to that tracking issue :)

@traviscross traviscross assigned Zalathar and unassigned scottmcm Dec 31, 2024
@traviscross traviscross added T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. and removed T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Dec 31, 2024
@compiler-errors compiler-errors added S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Dec 31, 2024
@clarfonthey
Copy link
Contributor Author

I should clarify, I never noticed the separate issue that got filed because it was edited in a comment after the fact, and I never got notified for the edit (only the original comment).

But I was under the impression that the largest barriers to stabilisation were getting the lang team on board, which requires an FCP, which for them, requires a PR.

I don't mind updating this PR and fixing the merge conflicts as they come up, or helping implement proposed changes as needed. I just knew that a PR was required to start the FCP, so, I made one.

@clarfonthey
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing for now; see #134749 (comment)

@clarfonthey clarfonthey closed this Jan 1, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-blocked Status: Blocked on something else such as an RFC or other implementation work. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-lang Relevant to the language team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants