Stream: t-compiler

Topic: cargo-bisect-rustc


Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 18:58, on Zulip):

@simulacrum about cargo-bisect-rustc that we have talked about previously ...

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 18:58, on Zulip):

in particular from the document I've built

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 18:58, on Zulip):

the documented tasks https://hackmd.io/Ipu9wSL4SCyx9_adR6GKLg?view

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 18:59, on Zulip):

I'm not entirely sure about

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 18:59, on Zulip):
* Use currently installed toolchain as end point (if no end is provided)
    * use current default toolchain
    * make sure this is easy to override with cargo +stage1 bisect-rustc
    * print nice error message for beta/stable as default, see task below
Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 18:59, on Zulip):

I meant, isn't that already done by the tool?

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 18:59, on Zulip):

if no end it's provided it uses the latest nightly

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 18:59, on Zulip):

ahh is it about installing it or not?

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:00, on Zulip):

it definitely uses latest nightly, unsure if it checks if you have installed it or not

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:00, on Zulip):

but trying to understand exactly the task

simulacrum (Oct 23 2019 at 19:03, on Zulip):

I think today we ignore your system config and use the most recent nightly

simulacrum (Oct 23 2019 at 19:03, on Zulip):

which seems fine

simulacrum (Oct 23 2019 at 19:03, on Zulip):

but we could be "better" by trying to figure out what you probably just tested with and look at the toolchain in the current directory

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:05, on Zulip):

so the idea is if you have a nightly installed use that one, otherwise do what we currently do?

simulacrum (Oct 23 2019 at 19:40, on Zulip):

Basically, yeah

simulacrum (Oct 23 2019 at 19:41, on Zulip):

I would just run rustc -vV and go from there rather than trying to interact with rustup or whatever

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:42, on Zulip):

ok

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:42, on Zulip):

@simulacrum also, what's cargo-bisect-rustc --install date_or_commit useful for?

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:42, on Zulip):

I guess mainly because of the commit option?

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:42, on Zulip):

otherwise you would just install using rustup, no?

simulacrum (Oct 23 2019 at 19:43, on Zulip):

If it's not nightly I would ignore (maybe with warning message)

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:43, on Zulip):

yes

simulacrum (Oct 23 2019 at 19:43, on Zulip):

I forget what that's for, but yeah I'd drop, people can just use rustup toolchain install master today I think

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:44, on Zulip):

ok

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:44, on Zulip):

doesn't hurt, I'm just trying to understand some things :)

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 23 2019 at 19:44, on Zulip):

but yeah if you give that a commit it clones the repo and all that

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:33, on Zulip):

@simulacrum I was wondering how were you typically testing the tool

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

I, uh, didn't really

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

:)

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 16:36, on Zulip):

I have no good ideas as to how to do so

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:39, on Zulip):

yeah, I have some but I guess it doesn't worth the effort :)

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

I was doing some stuff but ended figuring out that some of the things may be "risky" to do

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

I've quoted "risky" because dunno it's just a tool

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

but you may end with your default intalled nightly removed or stuff like that

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:40, on Zulip):

for instance, let me show you some stuff ...

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:41, on Zulip):

here one nightly is removed

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:42, on Zulip):

which is called from https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/cargo-bisect-rustc/blob/master/src/main.rs#L503

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:42, on Zulip):

inside test fn

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:42, on Zulip):

or here https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/cargo-bisect-rustc/blob/master/src/main.rs#L799

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:42, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/cargo-bisect-rustc/blob/master/src/main.rs#L808

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:43, on Zulip):

so on bisect fn also on bisect_nightlies

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

in particular

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/cargo-bisect-rustc/blob/master/src/main.rs#L503

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

and

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/cargo-bisect-rustc/blob/master/src/main.rs#L798-L800

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:44, on Zulip):

but unsure if that happens after every call to test

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

well this one https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/cargo-bisect-rustc/blob/master/src/main.rs#L876-L878 is also after a test call

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

yeah, after all tests calls are remove calls so I guess the call to remove inside test could be removed

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

anyway, that was not my point

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 16:45, on Zulip):

mhm

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

the thing I'm trying to decide is if I should just be deciding every remove call comparing rustc -vV output with the thing that the call wants to remove

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

probably that's the safest thing

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:47, on Zulip):

because I was just trying to track that through all the program and I see there are a lot of cases that causes me some confusion still

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:48, on Zulip):

or maybe rather I can refactor a bit the code so make things a bit more clear to me :)

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 16:50, on Zulip):

hm not sure I follow

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 16:50, on Zulip):

those removes all look mostly fine to me

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 16:50, on Zulip):

it might be good to guard them with a "we installed this nightly this session"

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 16:51, on Zulip):

that wouldn't be too hard (especially if we just stick it in a global static)

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:58, on Zulip):

one of the things I've just said is that test fn is calling remove inside the test fn itself but also all the callers call it after calling test

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:58, on Zulip):

I guess we could remove the call from inside test

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:58, on Zulip):

but anyway that's a minor thing which I don't care that much to be honest :)

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 16:59, on Zulip):

it might be good to guard them with a "we installed this nightly this session"

what I also was proposing is, instead of a global static, when installing or removing just calling rustc (or a cached version of the result) and check the date of that with the date of the thing you're trying to install/remove

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 17:01, on Zulip):

oh

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 17:01, on Zulip):

_that_ failure case I didn't consider

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 17:01, on Zulip):

seems fine though

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:19, on Zulip):

@simulacrum sorry, I got back to this

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:19, on Zulip):

couldn't put a lot of effort yet on it

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:19, on Zulip):

but https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/cargo-bisect-rustc/pull/37

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:20, on Zulip):

there are some quick and dirty things that I'm not sure how important would be to refactor, to make it the best design in the world :P

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:20, on Zulip):

anyway, let me know your thoughts about this first part

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:20, on Zulip):

I didn't even test this, just open the thing for discussion

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:21, on Zulip):

I may need to find at least a manual way to test some stuff, have a couple of scenarios because I'm gonna need that

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:21, on Zulip):

ideas are welcome

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:22, on Zulip):

this https://github.com/spastorino/cargo-bisect-sample was one of my first ideas, to have some examples around that I could use to play with

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:22, on Zulip):

also the README of the tool has another example like that one

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:40, on Zulip):

btw after running some examples found some mistake, gonna fix it tomorrow probably

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 20:43, on Zulip):

okay reping me here probably when that's done

simulacrum (Oct 24 2019 at 20:43, on Zulip):

I might take a look later today at the code though

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:45, on Zulip):

:+1:

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:46, on Zulip):

I think there are usages of toolchain dates that I didn't get correct because this is not doing the right thing

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:46, on Zulip):

but most of the things that I need to code are there

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 24 2019 at 20:46, on Zulip):

probably some bits are wrong, gonna check out tomorrow

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 02:59, on Zulip):

@simulacrum as you may have seen on the other thread I've just tested the stuff and seems to be working fine :)

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 11:12, on Zulip):

this "other thread" reminded me I promised to add some documentation about bors' commits, so here's https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/cargo-bisect-rustc/pull/38 @simulacrum -- and I mentioned here we might need to do something in cargo-bisect-rustc to help with bisections hitting the very frequent rollups, and which is a use-case I don't think I've seen that mentioned in the requirements hackmds here ?

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 11:52, on Zulip):

we should have less rollups :/

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 11:52, on Zulip):

Though I was thinking this morning that one possible avenue to look at is to make r+ auto-trigger a bors try build

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 11:53, on Zulip):

that would give us by-PR bisectionish within a rollup (though somewhat manual) -- they wouldn't be linear -- but it might be good enough

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 11:53, on Zulip):

can we maybe use the PR artifacts ?

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 11:54, on Zulip):

(if some of them are usable, that is, I don't assume a new nightly is built by the PR builders)

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 11:55, on Zulip):

yeah maybe the try build could be good enough indeed

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 11:56, on Zulip):

PRs don't on their own produce artifacts, that's what you need a try build for

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 11:56, on Zulip):

in theory any rollup could trigger try builds for each of its contained PRs, even, in parallel but with the proper ordering so that it "looks" like the rollup merges are actually bors merges

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 11:57, on Zulip):

I expect that we could handle ~8 more builders (or whatever the average rollup size is) on our CI

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 11:58, on Zulip):

that seems like it could work :)

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 11:59, on Zulip):

it feels like rollups would be a pretty big roadblock to a bisection ICE-breakers team, and this could help out a lot

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 12:01, on Zulip):

a _lot_ of the time once you know what rollup it is guessing is not too hard

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 12:01, on Zulip):

and I imagine it'd be super helpful to even get just the rollup

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 12:05, on Zulip):

sure, I agree, and even if icebreakers may not be able to guess, the team can do so once the rollup is known

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 12:07, on Zulip):

with the "rollup @try"s there hopefully would be almost no need to do so, even when the rollup contains more than one PR in the same area which sometimes happen iirc

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 17:36, on Zulip):

@lqd unsure I understood correctly what you issue are you seeing with rollups

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 17:37, on Zulip):

I guess that the tool is going to see that as a unit

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 17:37, on Zulip):

the issue is that you don't want that to be a unit?

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 17:37, on Zulip):

I meant, for sure it would be better, but shouldn't in rollups in general be included non risky things?

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 18:18, on Zulip):

I'm not sure I understand, the more rollups we do, the more likely they are going to be the PR that cargo-bisect-rustc finds; rollups are because CI would otherwise take too long, and bugs requiring bisection can be "non-risky" and included in rollups. It seems nowadays it's more the norm than the exception. What I meant is: if the tool could help continue the process instead of stopping at the rollup PR, as it does today, it would help avoid the manual process that follows of sifting through the 5-10 rolled-up PRs. And this is is looking more and more likely to happen in the future as we use rollups a lot

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 18:20, on Zulip):

yes, that's what I got from your message but wasn't sure :)

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 18:20, on Zulip):

we can add that to the md notes

lqd (Oct 25 2019 at 18:21, on Zulip):

it's not absolutely indispensable of course, as you've seen we've managed fine without it til now :)

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 19:22, on Zulip):

btw, @nikomatsakis yesterday's code example with the new jumps

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 19:22, on Zulip):
[santiago@galago cargo-bisect-sample2 (master)]$ ../cargo-bisect-rustc/target/debug/cargo-bisect-rustc
checking nightly-2019-10-16
checking nightly-2019-10-14
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 17.88 MB / 17.88 MB [=================================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 4.84 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-14
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-14
checking nightly-2019-10-12
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 17.36 MB / 17.36 MB [=================================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.47 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-12
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-12
checking nightly-2019-10-10
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 177.63 MB / 177.63 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.75 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-10
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-10
checking nightly-2019-10-08
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 176.71 MB / 176.71 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 6.64 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-08
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-08
checking nightly-2019-10-01
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 172.77 MB / 172.77 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 6.68 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-01
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-01                                                                                                                                                                                                         [5/57]
checking nightly-2019-09-24
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 175.85 MB / 175.85 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.86 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-24
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-24
checking nightly-2019-09-17
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-17
checking nightly-2019-09-16
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 175.97 MB / 175.97 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.85 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-16
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-16
checking nightly-2019-09-09
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 174.41 MB / 174.41 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.56 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-09
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-09
checking nightly-2019-09-02
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 175.62 MB / 175.62 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.86 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-02
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-02
checking nightly-2019-08-26
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.10 MB / 173.10 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.57 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-26
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-26
checking nightly-2019-08-12
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 169.94 MB / 169.94 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 6.52 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-12
verifying the start of the range does not reproduce the regression
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 169.94 MB / 169.94 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 8.02 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-12
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-12
tested nightly-2019-08-12, got No
confirmed the start of the range does not reproduce the regression
verifying the end of the range reproduces the regression
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.10 MB / 173.10 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.91 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-26
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-26
tested nightly-2019-08-26, got Yes
confirmed the end of the range reproduces the regression
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.53 MB / 173.53 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 6.65 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-19
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-19
tested nightly-2019-08-19, got No
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.78 MB / 173.78 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.55 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-22
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-22
tested nightly-2019-08-22, got Yes
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.91 MB / 173.91 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 1.21 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-20
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-20
tested nightly-2019-08-20, got No
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.65 MB / 173.65 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.55 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-21
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-21
tested nightly-2019-08-21, got Yes
searched toolchains nightly-2019-08-12 through nightly-2019-08-26
regression in nightly-2019-08-21
[santiago@galago cargo-bisect-sample2 (master)]$
Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 19:23, on Zulip):

it nows catches the regression and does not jump over the "correct" nightlies

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 21:20, on Zulip):
[santiago@galago cargo-bisect-sample2 (master)]$ ../cargo-bisect-rustc/target/debug/cargo-bisect-rustc                                                                                                                                 [7/835]
checking nightly-2019-10-16 from the currently installed default nightly toolchain as the last failure
checking nightly-2019-10-14
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 17.88 MB / 17.88 MB [=================================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 8.29 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-14
checking nightly-2019-10-12
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 17.36 MB / 17.36 MB [=================================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.50 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-12
checking nightly-2019-10-10
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 177.63 MB / 177.63 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.72 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-10
checking nightly-2019-10-08
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 176.71 MB / 176.71 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 8.05 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-08
checking nightly-2019-10-01
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 172.77 MB / 172.77 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.78 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-10-01
checking nightly-2019-09-24
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 175.85 MB / 175.85 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.97 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-24
checking nightly-2019-09-17
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-17
checking nightly-2019-09-16
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 175.97 MB / 175.97 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.45 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-16
checking nightly-2019-09-10
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 174.98 MB / 174.98 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 6.61 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-10
checking nightly-2019-09-03
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 175.47 MB / 175.47 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.06 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-09-03
checking nightly-2019-08-27
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 174.36 MB / 174.36 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.50 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-27
checking nightly-2019-08-13
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.10 MB / 173.10 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.28 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-13
verifying the start of the range does not reproduce the regression
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.10 MB / 173.10 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 8.25 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-13
tested nightly-2019-08-13, got No
confirmed the start of the range does not reproduce the regression
verifying the end of the range reproduces the regression
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 174.36 MB / 174.36 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 8.21 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-27
tested nightly-2019-08-27, got Yes
confirmed the end of the range reproduces the regression
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.91 MB / 173.91 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.72 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-20
tested nightly-2019-08-20, got No
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.88 MB / 173.88 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.44 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-23
tested nightly-2019-08-23, got Yes
std for x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu: 173.65 MB / 173.65 MB [===============================================================================================================================================================] 100.00 % 7.66 MB/s
uninstalling nightly-2019-08-21
tested nightly-2019-08-21, got Yes
searched toolchains nightly-2019-08-13 through nightly-2019-08-27
regression in nightly-2019-08-21
[santiago@galago cargo-bisect-sample2 (master)]$
Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 21:20, on Zulip):

@simulacrum a bit cleaner :)

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 21:21, on Zulip):

one thing I've actually wanted to suggest -- not sure how feasible it is -- but to give some sort of idea of "what we tested" and maybe even a "what we know" throughout the process

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 21:22, on Zulip):

not sure how useful that'd be

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 21:22, on Zulip):

I sometimes feel like the tool is very much a black box which is not great

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 21:22, on Zulip):

I also wonder if renaming it might make sense -- we're not really bisecting in the common case

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 21:22, on Zulip):

even if I think about it as bisection :)

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 21:26, on Zulip):

cargo-rustc-regression?

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 21:27, on Zulip):

something like that, yeah

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 21:27, on Zulip):

:+1: from me, do you agree with the naming?

Santiago Pastorino (Oct 25 2019 at 21:27, on Zulip):

any other better idea?

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 21:31, on Zulip):

Seems fine. Might be good to ask broader feedback, maybe someone has better ideas. I'm not too happy with it, though I think it's already pretty good

simulacrum (Oct 25 2019 at 21:31, on Zulip):

maybe something like "bug finder" could work

ecstatic-morse (Oct 25 2019 at 22:14, on Zulip):

(deleted)

Last update: Nov 16 2019 at 02:00UTC