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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Migrate item_proc_macro to Askama #112031

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 31, 2023
Merged

Migrate item_proc_macro to Askama #112031

merged 1 commit into from
May 31, 2023

Conversation

sladyn98
Copy link
Contributor

This PR migrates item_proc_macro to Askama

Refers #108868

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented May 28, 2023

r? @GuillaumeGomez

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels May 28, 2023
nicklimmm
nicklimmm reviewed May 29, 2023
View reviewed changes
src/librustdoc/html/render/print_item.rs
it: &clean::Item,
m: &clean::ProcMacro,
) {
let mut buffer = Buffer::new();
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just passing by on some changes happening around :)

Wondering, does the usage of Buffer here costs us some extra allocations? I believe we can use display_fn() to reduce that (?)

CMIIW @GuillaumeGomez

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This are some of my initial contributions to the compiler : )
I was thinking might not be a straightforward replacement in this case, as you'd need to handle the different MacroKind cases inside the provided function, which could make the code a bit more complex. Also, it would require changing wrap_item function, since we are passing a closure that modifies a buffer.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Well, simplest answer: let's run perf check on this PR. :)

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label May 29, 2023
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 29, 2023

⌛ Trying commit 5c780d9 with merge 73fbdc842eb23e6820d7f013f2aa8fc4f280ce25...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 29, 2023

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 73fbdc842eb23e6820d7f013f2aa8fc4f280ce25 (73fbdc842eb23e6820d7f013f2aa8fc4f280ce25)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view
@sladyn98
Copy link
Contributor Author

I would be curious to know how to read the perf-test result. So that I can read them in the future. Do let me know what metrics are considered , would love to learn : )

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (73fbdc842eb23e6820d7f013f2aa8fc4f280ce25): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

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

Instruction count

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 2.5% [2.5%, 2.5%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 -4.3% [-4.3%, -4.3%] 1
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)		 - - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)		 - - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)		 -1.2% [-1.2%, -1.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)		 - - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -1.2% [-1.2%, -1.2%] 1

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 643.081s -> 643.751s (0.10%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label May 29, 2023
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

@sladyn98 You can see the report in the previous message. :)

No perf changes so let's approve it!

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented May 30, 2023

📌 Commit 5c780d9 has been approved by GuillaumeGomez

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels May 30, 2023
Dylan-DPC added a commit to Dylan-DPC/rust that referenced this pull request May 30, 2023
@Dylan-DPC
Rollup merge of rust-lang#112031 - sladyn98:migrate-proc-macro, r=Gui…
658bd78 
…llaumeGomez

Migrate  `item_proc_macro` to Askama

This PR migrates `item_proc_macro` to Askama

Refers rust-lang#108868
@Dylan-DPC Dylan-DPC mentioned this pull request May 30, 2023
Closed
@matthiaskrgr matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request May 31, 2023
Merged
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request May 31, 2023
@bors
Auto merge of rust-lang#112127 - matthiaskrgr:rollup-77pt893, r=matth…
617d3d6 
…iaskrgr

Rollup of 7 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#112031 (Migrate  `item_proc_macro` to Askama)
 - rust-lang#112053 (Remove `-Zcgu-partitioning-strategy`.)
 - rust-lang#112069 (offset_of: don't require type to be `Sized`)
 - rust-lang#112084 (enhancements on  build_helper utilization and rustdoc-gui-test)
 - rust-lang#112096 (Remove array_zip)
 - rust-lang#112108 (Fix re-export of doc hidden item inside private item not displayed)
 - rust-lang#112113 (rustdoc: simplify `clean` by removing `FnRetTy`)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit fdd62cf into rust-lang:master May 31, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.72.0 milestone May 31, 2023
@clubby789 clubby789 mentioned this pull request Jun 10, 2024
Open
25 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez left review comments

@nicklimmm nicklimmm nicklimmm left review comments

Assignees

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez

Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
1.72.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@sladyn98 @rustbot @GuillaumeGomez @rust-timer @bors @nicklimmm