Conversation
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
a153f2c to
bc01cc0
Compare
|
@bors try @rust-timer queue |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Finished benchmarking commit (88b8a1c): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action neededBenchmarking 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 Instruction countOur most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 5.6%, secondary 0.1%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
CyclesResults (primary 2.1%, secondary 6.8%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Binary sizeResults (primary -0.0%, secondary -0.0%)A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.
Bootstrap: 487.434s -> 488.943s (0.31%) |
|
@craterbot check |
|
👌 Experiment ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more |
|
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #155056) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
…=WaffleLapkin tidy: handle `#[cfg_attr(bootstrap, doc = "...")]` in `compiler/` comments For the unbalanced backtick check that Waffle ran into in rust-lang#154887. This PR cherry-picks Waffle's tidy patch in that PR (and adds some explaining comments) even though I'd say this is somewhat hacky[^1]. But since the original tidy check implementation is already based on heuristics and so are likewise fuzzy, this is probably fine in practice for most cases. [^1]: There can be false positives/negatives like having both fragments `cfg_attr` and `doc` inside a string literal, but I would expect that to be very very niche, so it's "good enough". (I wanted to write a regression test, but this check needs some restructuring to make it more easy to test that I don't want to bundle in this PR.) r? wafflelapkin (or bootstrap/compiler)
Rollup merge of #155195 - jieyouxu:tidy-compiler-doc-attr, r=WaffleLapkin tidy: handle `#[cfg_attr(bootstrap, doc = "...")]` in `compiler/` comments For the unbalanced backtick check that Waffle ran into in #154887. This PR cherry-picks Waffle's tidy patch in that PR (and adds some explaining comments) even though I'd say this is somewhat hacky[^1]. But since the original tidy check implementation is already based on heuristics and so are likewise fuzzy, this is probably fine in practice for most cases. [^1]: There can be false positives/negatives like having both fragments `cfg_attr` and `doc` inside a string literal, but I would expect that to be very very niche, so it's "good enough". (I wanted to write a regression test, but this check needs some restructuring to make it more easy to test that I don't want to bundle in this PR.) r? wafflelapkin (or bootstrap/compiler)
|
🚧 Experiment ℹ️ Crater is a tool to run experiments across parts of the Rust ecosystem. Learn more |
|
🎉 Experiment
Footnotes
|
meow meow meow meow meow