Stream: t-compiler

Topic: weekly meeting 2019-04-04 #54818


pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 11:28, on Zulip):

Hi @T-compiler/meeting ; our weekly meeting, held in this topic area, will be started in about 63 minutes 2.5 hours.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 11:29, on Zulip):

(sorry, cut-and-paste bug; now fixed.)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 11:29, on Zulip):

In the meantime, I'll be doing triage in a parallel topic.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 12:43, on Zulip):

:cant_talk: "closing beta 1.33 seems to break tarpaulin on multithreading" #58104 as non-actionable.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 13:12, on Zulip):

:alert: from @eddyb : const generics and PR #59369 both need input from traits/infer experts. @nikomatsakis is on PTO, so we're looking for volunteers.

eddyb (Apr 04 2019 at 13:13, on Zulip):

@centril you should move your message to this topic :P

eddyb (Apr 04 2019 at 13:13, on Zulip):

is @Ariel Ben-Yehuda available? I'm a bit unsure on who's around lately

eddyb (Apr 04 2019 at 13:15, on Zulip):

but I was thinking more @rust-lang/traits / Chalk / NLL

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 13:16, on Zulip):

@WG-traits ^ ?

Alexander Regueiro (Apr 04 2019 at 13:35, on Zulip):

Hi.

Alexander Regueiro (Apr 04 2019 at 13:35, on Zulip):

What’s PTO?

Alexander Regueiro (Apr 04 2019 at 13:36, on Zulip):

Not sure I can help much if it’s Chalk-related.

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 13:38, on Zulip):

@Alexander Regueiro paid time off

Alexander Regueiro (Apr 04 2019 at 13:38, on Zulip):

Ah

Alexander Regueiro (Apr 04 2019 at 13:39, on Zulip):

Just the week though or longer?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 13:39, on Zulip):

I think just this week

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 13:40, on Zulip):

Hey @eddyb , when you said "const generics" needed attention, were you referring to PR #59008 ? Or something else?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 13:41, on Zulip):

yes, must be, based on recent comment

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 13:41, on Zulip):

@Alexander Regueiro I think the immediate PR's that @eddyb was referencing do not involve Chalk. I'm not sure why @eddyb mentioned Chalk above.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 13:51, on Zulip):

:construction_worker: seeking volunteer to investigate unassigned P-high bug: "Compiler panic with generic-typed nested closures" #59494

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 13:53, on Zulip):

:construction_worker: seeking volunteer to investigate unassigned P-high bug: "ICE in librustc_codegen_llvm when building kernel" #59548

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:01, on Zulip):

Hi again @T-compiler/meeting , its meeting time

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:02, on Zulip):

happy end of DST-out-of-sync-between-USA-and-Europe, everyone

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:03, on Zulip):

btw, @varkor and @Zoxc, please have a look at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/59489 :slight_smile:

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:03, on Zulip):

so lets see

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:04, on Zulip):

as usual, we'll spend 30 min or so on triage stuff

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:04, on Zulip):

and then we'll have WG checkin

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:04, on Zulip):

I forgot to actually ping anyone from @WG-rls2.0 and @WG-meta

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:04, on Zulip):

so I don't know if we'll have a real proper checkin this week.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:05, on Zulip):

first up: I posted some notices already,

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:05, on Zulip):

please do skim over them

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:05, on Zulip):

but also, does anyone have anything they want to jump in and announce?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:06, on Zulip):

(i figure I can wait up to 5 minutes before we jump into beta-nominations. let us see if anything comes up.)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:07, on Zulip):

( @davidtwco , do you think there is anythign worth announcing from @WG-meta ?)

davidtwco (Apr 04 2019 at 14:07, on Zulip):

I forgot to actually ping anyone from @WG-rls2.0 and @WG-meta

There was no meeting for @WG-meta last week because of conferences. There's one scheduled for tonight but with @nikomatsakis on PTO, it's unlikely that anything happens. tl;dr no updates from wg-meta AFAIK.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:07, on Zulip):

heh you beat me to it

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:08, on Zulip):

okay. and @matklad, are you around? If so, would you be interesting in providing an entirely improvised check-in from @WG-rls2.0 ?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:08, on Zulip):

sure

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:08, on Zulip):

it wouldstart in

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

right now?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

about 25 minutes or so

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

unless you need to leave?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

in which case we can do things out of order

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

ah, ok, in 25 minutes it won't be improvised :)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

ha haha

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

that sounds even better

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

okay then

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:09, on Zulip):

Lets do triage and let @matklad do some prep in that case

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:10, on Zulip):

so, as mentioned, there are some unassigned bugs listed above. Look for the construction workers :construction_worker:

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:10, on Zulip):

but right now priority is beta nominations

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:10, on Zulip):

First is: "Fix error in Rust 2018 + no_core environment" #59462

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:11, on Zulip):

Q: no_core is unsable, why backport to beta?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:11, on Zulip):

/me might not understand something simple

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:12, on Zulip):

Maybe becasue beta is used for bootstrapping

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:12, on Zulip):

not yet sure

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:12, on Zulip):

but that is ... perhaps just for PR #58702 ?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:13, on Zulip):

hey @centril , are you asking us to backport something so that we can speed up when PR #58702 (transition libcore to 2018 edition) lands?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:13, on Zulip):

my personal inclination is to say no

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:13, on Zulip):

just because I do not perceive that has having sufficient motivation

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:14, on Zulip):

especially since the nightly-to-beta transition will happen next week anyway, right?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:14, on Zulip):

i.e. the big reason to have beta backports

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:14, on Zulip):

is not actually to improve beta

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:14, on Zulip):

it is to increase the speed at which something hits stable

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:14, on Zulip):

@pnkfelix right, the bootstrap compiler needs to be updated for this; but we have done beta backports for this purpose before

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:15, on Zulip):

and we will roll beta backports so might as well include in the rollup?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:16, on Zulip):

if we were at the beginning of a 6-week cycle, or if the PR being unblocked was super high priority, then I'd understand

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:16, on Zulip):

but in this context? I just don't get it

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:16, on Zulip):

e.g. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/59047#issuecomment-471202883

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:16, on Zulip):

(am I wrong about the timing of the nightly-to-beta rollover ?)

oli (Apr 04 2019 at 14:16, on Zulip):

nope, it's next week

oli (Apr 04 2019 at 14:17, on Zulip):

let's just let this run its course, it's not a fix that needs to happen fast

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:17, on Zulip):

aight

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:17, on Zulip):

okay

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:18, on Zulip):

next: "Hide deprecation warnings inside derive expansions" #58994

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:19, on Zulip):

So the dialogue on this ticket

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:19, on Zulip):

talks about just back porting "the first commit"

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:19, on Zulip):

but there's only one commit there now

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:20, on Zulip):

@pnkfelix the other ones were removed

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:20, on Zulip):

basically the PR switched from the current solution to a more complex one and then back

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:20, on Zulip):

okay

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:21, on Zulip):

should be backported imo, simple fix of an annoying bug

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:22, on Zulip):

I just finished reviewing. I'm included to backport

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:22, on Zulip):

Seems like at least one other person has tagged the :back: emoji

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:22, on Zulip):

yup

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:23, on Zulip):

out of curiosty

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:23, on Zulip):

have we confirmed this definitely fixes the issue

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:23, on Zulip):

for the person

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:23, on Zulip):

who said "I don't want to seem pushy" ?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:23, on Zulip):

Its probably works, what am I talking about

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:23, on Zulip):

:smiley:

oli (Apr 04 2019 at 14:24, on Zulip):

I included the test from the issue in the regression tests

centril (Apr 04 2019 at 14:24, on Zulip):

@pnkfelix there are test that exercise the behavior noted in the issue

oli (Apr 04 2019 at 14:24, on Zulip):

not sure what else to test xD

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:24, on Zulip):

okay

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:24, on Zulip):

person who filed issue was different from person who didn't want to be pushy

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:24, on Zulip):

but the latter did chime in

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:24, on Zulip):

so it seems reasonable to assume they indeed have same problem

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:24, on Zulip):

(and perhaps are collaborators with original issue filer)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:25, on Zulip):

okay, lets backport it then.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:25, on Zulip):

next: nominated issues

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:26, on Zulip):

there's a couple I want to be certain we hit

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:26, on Zulip):

first: "Incremental compilation error building rustc (-i --keep-stage 0)" #59105

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:26, on Zulip):

I dont know how to prioritize this

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:27, on Zulip):

I don't know how what keep-stage does

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:27, on Zulip):

but incr.comp. in a bootstrapping context is tricky

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:27, on Zulip):

the claim in the issue dialogue

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:27, on Zulip):

is that this is solely a rustbuild issue

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:27, on Zulip):

not a rustc one

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:28, on Zulip):

Do you think that claim is incorrect, @mw ?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:28, on Zulip):

e.g. this:

Yea, this is only related to rustbuild. The issue is that cargo does not track libstd as a dependency, so rustbuild needs to be careful to force rebuilding of crates when libstd changes. It does that currently (via clear_if_dirty), but it is missing the directory for proc-macros and build scripts.

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:28, on Zulip):

from looking at the issue, it seems more like a build system problem, yes

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:29, on Zulip):

So it might just be a matter of taking the steps to reproduce

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:29, on Zulip):

and then walking through the rustbuild (aka bootstrap) source

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:29, on Zulip):

to figure out what to change

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:29, on Zulip):

but that nonetheless doesn't answer the "how to prioritize" question

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:29, on Zulip):

I personally am inclined to give this P-medium priority

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:30, on Zulip):

while also imploring anyone who has any interest in this topic to please take a look.

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:30, on Zulip):

sgtm

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:30, on Zulip):

but I am also eager to hear if anyone wants to push for P-high on this.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:31, on Zulip):

okay, tagging P-medium

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:31, on Zulip):

and maybe I'll poke at it after I see about beta regressions

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:31, on Zulip):

next: "LNK1189 "library limit of 65535 obj exceeded" building rustc" #53014

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:31, on Zulip):

I wanted to mention this one

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:31, on Zulip):

because its pretty scary

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:32, on Zulip):

@mw do you know why this might be arising without using incremental mode, as one of the participants claimed?

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:32, on Zulip):

no

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:33, on Zulip):

I'd not expect this to be a problem

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:33, on Zulip):

I do agree that an upper-bound on number of object files seems like an easy constraint to impose, at least on incremental mode.

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:33, on Zulip):

unless the person has more than 2^16 cpu cores :)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:33, on Zulip):

maybe they are with the NSA

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:33, on Zulip):

or google (or apple, or intel ...)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:33, on Zulip):

anyway

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:34, on Zulip):

okay lets maybe work under the assumption that we should first aim to fix it with incremental mode

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:34, on Zulip):

and then see where things go from there.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:34, on Zulip):

@mw , I am willing to try to take this if you do not have the time.

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:34, on Zulip):

it doesn't make much of a difference, really

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:34, on Zulip):

or maybe it would be a good bug for @mw to mentor?

davidtwco (Apr 04 2019 at 14:34, on Zulip):

I recall seeing a similar issue when compiling rustc on Windows months ago.

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:35, on Zulip):

mentoring would be more work than writing a PR, I guess?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:35, on Zulip):

probably

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:35, on Zulip):

I'll assign myself for now, and talk to @mw more about it later.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:35, on Zulip):

next: "[do not merge] Measure performance impact of local interners" #57214

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:36, on Zulip):

there are only two outstanding votes here, from @nagisa and from @nikomatsakis ...

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:36, on Zulip):

hmm I guess with @nikomatsakis on PTO we should just let this sit for another week, never mind

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:36, on Zulip):

okay, next: "[firefox] error: relocation refers to local symbol "" [12], which is defined in a discarded section" #59652

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:37, on Zulip):

In my mind, making the compiler's source more approachable is more important than a small memory usage increase at this point

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:37, on Zulip):

we can probably afford to leave #59652 unassigned for a week, if need be

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:37, on Zulip):

i just want to draw attention to it here

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:37, on Zulip):

if the bisection is to be believed

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:38, on Zulip):

for some reason adding -Z emit-stack-sizes to the bootstrapping caused firefox builds to fail with the aforementioned relocation error

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:38, on Zulip):

which does not make any freaking sense to me.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:38, on Zulip):

unless the output from -Z emit-stack-sizes is going somewhere bad, and messing up a linker script somewhere or something

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:38, on Zulip):

(which ... is not actually the most absurd theory)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:39, on Zulip):

anyway if no one assigns themselves, I'll just leave #59652 nominated for a week

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:39, on Zulip):

next: "Implement "pipelined" rustc compilation (compiler side)" #58465

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:39, on Zulip):

there has been some recent discussion activity here

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:40, on Zulip):

which makes me think that we do have parties interested in taking action here

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:40, on Zulip):

my question is: What priority does this "pipelined rustc" work get?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:40, on Zulip):

to be clear, as I understand it, it is just a private interface with cargo

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:40, on Zulip):

not a public feature

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:40, on Zulip):

so there's plenty of room for experimentation and fun

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:41, on Zulip):

but that doesn't help me understand whether it should be a P-high work item or not

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:41, on Zulip):

it might not even need a separate interface for rustc, actually

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:41, on Zulip):

from reading cargo#6660, it sounds like rustc needs some changes

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:42, on Zulip):

@nnethercote might be looking into it

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:42, on Zulip):

in Q2

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:42, on Zulip):

hmm

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:42, on Zulip):

okay

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:42, on Zulip):

it looks like there's not that much work on the rustc side

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:42, on Zulip):

I think that is probably true

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:42, on Zulip):

okay well

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:43, on Zulip):

I'll leave it nominated just because @nikomatsakis is not here

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:43, on Zulip):

but I'm hoping we can remove it from the nominated list before next week's meeting.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:43, on Zulip):

Final nominated issue, lets just throw it on so we can move to @WG-rls2.0 checkin

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:43, on Zulip):

last nominated issue is "Unused arguments to async fn are dropped too early #54716"

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:43, on Zulip):

what priority is this one?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:44, on Zulip):

i.e. what priority do we give to Async-Await issues?

davidtwco (Apr 04 2019 at 14:45, on Zulip):

last nominated issue is "Unused arguments to async fn are dropped too early #54716"

I think this was for t-lang.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:45, on Zulip):

oh right

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:45, on Zulip):

I think I even noted that during pre-triage

davidtwco (Apr 04 2019 at 14:45, on Zulip):

see this comment

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:45, on Zulip):

okay lets move along then

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:46, on Zulip):

(I think my question still stands, to be honest, about what priority to assign. But we need not debate that now.)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:46, on Zulip):

So ... okay: @matklad , are you ready?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:46, on Zulip):

Sure!

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:46, on Zulip):

take it away

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:46, on Zulip):

We (primarally Florian Diebold ) are stedily moving forward towards using chalk in rust-analyzer

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:47, on Zulip):

there's a lot to do ther, of course, but we are closer :)

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:47, on Zulip):

There's also some progress on the name resolution and macro expansion front: nikomatsakis had a briliant idea about making macro expansion more incremental, and it works in the prtotype impl

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:48, on Zulip):

The actual name resolution is waiting for @pnkfelix and nikomatsakis though: hopefully we create a plan of attack next week?

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:48, on Zulip):

right, that's the hope

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:49, on Zulip):

is there a description of incremental macro expansion somewhere?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:49, on Zulip):

@mw there's a recording and a paper doc

mw (Apr 04 2019 at 14:49, on Zulip):

cool

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:49, on Zulip):

https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/185405-t-compiler.2Fwg-rls-2.2E0/topic/Macros.20VS.20salsa

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:50, on Zulip):

Another big change is (yet another) syntax tree rewrite: we no longer separately allocate each token, and store them inline in parent nodes instead. That leads to a 30% improvement in speed in memory usage

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:51, on Zulip):

(which speaks more about inefficiencies in the original impl :) )

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:51, on Zulip):

And I am also starting to look into extracting rustc's lexer into a stand-alone crate: seems like a nice first stab at practical librarification

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:52, on Zulip):

That I think is all about big changes to the core things.

We had a ton of other improvements as well though: most notable is the new cargo watch integration, which is a low-cost way to get error-highlighting in the editor

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:53, on Zulip):

where can one learn more about that?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:53, on Zulip):

About cargo-watch?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:54, on Zulip):

As a user, you don't need to learn: rust-analyzer, in VS Code, will ask you about enabling cargo-watch

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:54, on Zulip):

ah okay

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:54, on Zulip):

The impls is these two PRs:

https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/995

https://github.com/rust-analyzer/rust-analyzer/pull/1079

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:55, on Zulip):

I guess I'm trying to understand at a high level

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:56, on Zulip):

cargo watch already existed, right?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:56, on Zulip):

oh, that's simple

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:56, on Zulip):

we run literal cargo watch subprocess

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:56, on Zulip):

which does all the heavy lifting

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:57, on Zulip):

I'm sorry, I'm still not getting it

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:57, on Zulip):

Does cargo watch start invoking rust-analyzer in some way?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:57, on Zulip):

So, cargo watch is a custom cargo subcommand, that waches files for changes and invocke cargo check

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:57, on Zulip):

or are you just taking the output generated by cargo watch and integrating it into VS Code?

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:58, on Zulip):

and yeah, we just parse its output and feed into VS Code.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:58, on Zulip):

okay okay

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:58, on Zulip):

In particular, it doesn't work if the files are not saved

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:58, on Zulip):

I wasn't sure what was being integrated with what

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 14:59, on Zulip):

ah good point

matklad (Apr 04 2019 at 14:59, on Zulip):

To be clear, this code lives completely outside of rust-analyzer, it's specific to VS Code extension in type-script

Alan Du (Apr 04 2019 at 14:59, on Zulip):

(deleted)

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 15:00, on Zulip):

okay I get it now.

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 15:00, on Zulip):

thank you very much @matklad for the improptu update from @WG-rls2.0 !

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 15:00, on Zulip):

I need to go AFK now, but I want to also thank everyone in @T-compiler/meeting for attending!

eddyb (Apr 04 2019 at 15:01, on Zulip):

oh great I managed to miss the meeting, good job eddy

eddyb (Apr 04 2019 at 15:02, on Zulip):

I brought up Chalk because all the new stuff in the inference system is very much Chalk-oriented

eddyb (Apr 04 2019 at 15:02, on Zulip):

but at the same time, it's used for NLL

pnkfelix (Apr 04 2019 at 15:02, on Zulip):

ha ha, @eddyb , I literally asked you a couple hours ago if you needed me to ping you before the meeting

eddyb (Apr 04 2019 at 15:02, on Zulip):

which is pretty mind-blowing

eddyb (Apr 04 2019 at 15:03, on Zulip):

it wouldn't have helped, I wasn't paying attention to anything on my laptop

nnethercote (Apr 04 2019 at 21:34, on Zulip):

Yep, I am planning to work on cargo pipelining in Q2. I'm meeting with @Alex Crichton today to get necessary background knowledge

Last update: Nov 21 2019 at 15:00UTC