Stream: t-compiler/wg-prioritization

Topic: pre-meeting triage 2020-03-19 #54818


Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:01, on Zulip):

@WG-prioritization I will be doing pre-triage in this channel. People that want to participate are more than welcome!.

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:11, on Zulip):

Link back to weekly meeting: https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/weekly.20meeting.202020-03-19.20.2354818

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:14, on Zulip):

yeah, :+1:, sorry that I didn't continue with this

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:14, on Zulip):

I was checking WGs checkins and seems like both groups that need to provide a checkin are retired

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:19, on Zulip):

ok, so let's get started

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:19, on Zulip):

first up, nominated unprioritized issues

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:20, on Zulip):

there are 7 of them

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:21, on Zulip):

unpri nom 1/7: "ICE when casting negative discriminant enum values to anything less than bit width" #70114

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:23, on Zulip):

that seems bad

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:23, on Zulip):

at least it says ...

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:23, on Zulip):

Unsigned value 0xffffffffffffffff does not fit in 32 bits

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:24, on Zulip):

the issue exists in stable

Wesley Wiser (Mar 18 2020 at 19:26, on Zulip):

The backtrace implicates ConstProp so this probably broke in 1.39 or 1.40 whenever that shipped on by default.

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:26, on Zulip):

maybe ... react with :wave: the ones that are following along, so I know if somebody wants to participate and wants to discuss about assigning things a priority :smile:

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:26, on Zulip):

@Wesley Wiser can we assign you to the issue?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

Wesley Wiser said:

The backtrace implicates ConstProp so this probably broke in 1.39 or 1.40 whenever that shipped on by default.

yeah, I was thinking exactly about that. Tempted to assign this P-medium based on that but also seems bad :)

Wesley Wiser (Mar 18 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

@centril Yeah

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

in the new scheme that we would have P-critical and P-high I'd say P-high

Wesley Wiser (Mar 18 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

1.40 so it's not a recent stable-to-stable regression

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:28, on Zulip):

yep

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:28, on Zulip):

still, it's a stable-stable regression, so should be p-high

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:28, on Zulip):

code that worked no longer works

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:29, on Zulip):

well that's different to the criteria @pnkfelix has been applying

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:29, on Zulip):

@Santiago Pastorino how so?

Wesley Wiser (Mar 18 2020 at 19:30, on Zulip):

@centril You want the stable-to-stable tag right? Not stage-to-beta

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:30, on Zulip):

yep

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:30, on Zulip):

clearly we need to start using the new schema

pnkfelix (Mar 18 2020 at 19:30, on Zulip):

I'm pretty sure there exist stable-to-stable regressions that have been prioritized as P-medium, under the argument that "people have been getting by without this being fixed." It usually applies only to cases where the injection point has long past.

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:30, on Zulip):

I meant, this should not block the release

pnkfelix (Mar 18 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

But this sounds like a more recent injection?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

very very few things would block an actual release

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

I think this is something we should prioritize fixing quickly

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

in that sense I agree

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

even if it doesn't block release

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

we need to change the P labeling scheme soon :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

I think this is P-high but not P-critical with the lack of those labels unsure

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

but I think it's ok P-high yeah

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

the issue is bad so ...

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

Most important thing is that it has an assignee that knows the subject matter :P

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

:)

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

that makes it much more likely that it actually gets fixed faster than any label

pnkfelix (Mar 18 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

/me wonders why this ICE does not seem to replicate on godbolt

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

ok, removing nomination, assigning P-high

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

@pnkfelix you need the flags

Wesley Wiser (Mar 18 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

@pnkfelix You need to pass --crate-type=bin

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

I was just trying out on my console too

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):
[santiago@galago tmp]$ rustc test.rs
error: internal compiler error: src/librustc/mir/interpret/value.rs:297: Unsigned value 0xffffffffffffffff does not fit in 32 bits

thread 'rustc' panicked at 'Box<Any>', src/librustc_errors/lib.rs:875:9
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace

note: the compiler unexpectedly panicked. this is a bug.

note: we would appreciate a bug report: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#bug-reports

note: rustc 1.43.0-nightly (564758c4c 2020-03-08) running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

error: aborting due to previous error
Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

just in case, there are no flags involved, yeah crate-type=bin :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:35, on Zulip):

ok, removing nomination and p-high

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:36, on Zulip):

unpri nom 2/7: "no_mangle causes compilation errors with async-await on armv7-linux-androideabi and aarch64-linux-android targets" #70098

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:37, on Zulip):

well also a regression, but linker stuff... always harder, and android... also harder

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:37, on Zulip):

this is android

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:37, on Zulip):

==> tier 2

Wesley Wiser (Mar 18 2020 at 19:37, on Zulip):

Looks like an LLVM issue

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:37, on Zulip):

this is also stable-to-beta

Wesley Wiser (Mar 18 2020 at 19:37, on Zulip):

Is tagging the ICE breaker group appropriate?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:38, on Zulip):

@Wesley Wiser good idea

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:38, on Zulip):

yep

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:38, on Zulip):

..and done

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:38, on Zulip):

also, we should ping ICE breakers cleanup group

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:39, on Zulip):

done

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:39, on Zulip):

given that this is a regression

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:39, on Zulip):

about priority? hmm

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:39, on Zulip):

ETOOMANYLABELS

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:39, on Zulip):

P-medium cause tier 2

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:39, on Zulip):

hehehe, I'd say so

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:40, on Zulip):

one thing though, if it's tier 2 but it's a very bad bug I guess it should be P-high anyway?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:40, on Zulip):

like if a hello world doesn't work on android I'd be tempted to say P-high

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:41, on Zulip):

anyway, in this case let's go with P-medium

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:41, on Zulip):

removed nomination adding p-medium

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:42, on Zulip):

unpri nom 3/7: "Ungreat change to doctest test names" #70090

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:42, on Zulip):

so this is probably due to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/66364, which made some improvements elsewhere, but seems like it regressed this test name a bit

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:43, on Zulip):

though the existing test name was pretty bad too

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:43, on Zulip):

yeah IMO this is not p-high at all :)

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:43, on Zulip):

seems like @eddyb has ideas about fixing it

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:43, on Zulip):

ill go cc @GuillaumeGomez

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:44, on Zulip):

in fact... remove t-compiler label?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:44, on Zulip):

I guess we can just remove ... yeah also that :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:44, on Zulip):

priority?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:45, on Zulip):

let t-rustdoc decide :P

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:45, on Zulip):

not sure if it's important ... yeah :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:45, on Zulip):

well given that I just removed t-compiler label I don't need to remove nomination

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:45, on Zulip):

would leave nomination for rustdoc team to decide

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:45, on Zulip):

mhm

DPC (Mar 18 2020 at 19:46, on Zulip):

does a member get a ping if they are not in the stream? i think they do but just checking :slight_smile:

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:46, on Zulip):

@DPC you can subscribe them

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:46, on Zulip):

but I didn't

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:46, on Zulip):

(cced on issue instead)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:46, on Zulip):

should we ping rust-lang/rustdoc?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:47, on Zulip):

might as well; but /rustdoc is basically @GuillaumeGomez :D

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:47, on Zulip):

ok :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:48, on Zulip):

ohh you commented too, anyway :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:49, on Zulip):

unpri nom 4/7: "miri no longer builds after rust-lang/rust#67133" #70055

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:49, on Zulip):

we discussed this issue last meeting

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:50, on Zulip):

I continue to think that a) miri & clippy is not t-compiler's problem, b) this will get fixed and then break again quickly... so it's pointless to use up time on this

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:50, on Zulip):

this should not be P-high and @RalfJ takes care of that usually

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:50, on Zulip):

yep

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:50, on Zulip):

let's just remove nomination

DPC (Mar 18 2020 at 19:50, on Zulip):

agree

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:50, on Zulip):

I would suggest changing the bot to not put i-nominated on this

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:50, on Zulip):

cc @simulacrum ^--

simulacrum (Mar 18 2020 at 19:51, on Zulip):

:shrug: unopposed, but would leave it up to t-compiler to decide (I guess this WG). If not useful then removing the label is not too hard

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:52, on Zulip):

So let's try a straw poll...

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:52, on Zulip):

Should we remove I-nominated on toolstate breakage issues?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:52, on Zulip):

is there a github group for miri?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:52, on Zulip):

couldn't find one, ended pinging @RalfJ

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:53, on Zulip):

centril said:

Should we remove I-nominated on toolstate breakage issues?

remember that most people are not subscribed to this stream though :)

pnkfelix (Mar 18 2020 at 19:53, on Zulip):

maybe we can also discuss it quickly at T-compiler meeting tomorrow?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:54, on Zulip):

yeah I was thinking exactly about that :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:54, on Zulip):

:+1:

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:54, on Zulip):

unpri nom 5/7: "OOM (huge memory usage) during release compilation with include_str of 100MB" #70035

pnkfelix (Mar 18 2020 at 19:54, on Zulip):

I don't think the decision requires a full approval of everyone on T-compiler, but it seems like it wouldn't hurt to have a simlar straw poll there, assuming that no one here ends up objecting.

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:54, on Zulip):

sure, @Santiago Pastorino can you add to agenda?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:54, on Zulip):

yes

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:56, on Zulip):

Santiago Pastorino said:

unpri nom 5/7: "OOM (huge memory usage) during release compilation with include_str of 100MB" #70035

back to this, seems pretty bad IMO

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:56, on Zulip):

regression from stable to stable

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:56, on Zulip):

where is the time being spent?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:57, on Zulip):

err... memory, not time

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:58, on Zulip):

yeah

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:58, on Zulip):

rustc 1.41.0 (5e1a79984 2020-01-27): 16GB
rustc 1.40.0 (73528e339 2019-12-16): 2.5GB

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:58, on Zulip):

something pretty bad in between happened

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 19:58, on Zulip):

something something new lexer something something?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 19:59, on Zulip):

I'd assign something like this P-high seems bad IMO

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:00, on Zulip):

probably pathological though

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:00, on Zulip):

though it was a real project

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:00, on Zulip):

first step is probably to see in what "phase" the memory is spent

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:01, on Zulip):

hmm yeah, by that you meant that's hard to fix I guess :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:01, on Zulip):

by pathological, hard or you're guessing almost impossible

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:01, on Zulip):

more like... you have to be doing something pretty weird to experience this

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:01, on Zulip):

very corner case probably

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:02, on Zulip):

let's cc cleanup + matklad perhaps?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:02, on Zulip):

under the assumption that this is a lexer issue

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:02, on Zulip):

yeah

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:02, on Zulip):

have you seen https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/52380 ?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:03, on Zulip):

cleanup to find the regression between 1.40 and 1.41?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:03, on Zulip):

although python -c "print('foo bar baz qux 1337 42\n' * 4_500_000)" > testdata seems like a well-formed token stream

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:04, on Zulip):

but it's not well formed according to the parser

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:05, on Zulip):

still, there could be interactions btw lexer/parser

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:06, on Zulip):

hmm

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:06, on Zulip):

priority?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:06, on Zulip):

medium?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:06, on Zulip):

code still "works"

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:06, on Zulip):

:+1:

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:06, on Zulip):

agree

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:08, on Zulip):

last one: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69952

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:08, on Zulip):

unpri nom 6/7: " clippy-driver no longer builds after rust-lang/rust#69950" #69957

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:08, on Zulip):

well the same and this one is closed :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:09, on Zulip):

saw @centril just removed nomination :+1:

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:09, on Zulip):

maybe exclude closed issues :D

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:09, on Zulip):

unpri nom 7/7: "Regression of #53738: spurious single_use_lifetimes warning" #69952

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:10, on Zulip):

lets cc cleanup; prio p-medium?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:10, on Zulip):

centril said:

maybe exclude closed issues :D

yeah I guess they are included so we just remove the nomination

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:10, on Zulip):

centril said:

lets cc cleanup; prio p-medium?

agreed

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:11, on Zulip):

ohh nice bot "bug" :)

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:11, on Zulip):

we've cleared all issues

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:11, on Zulip):

race condition between you and the bot :)

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:11, on Zulip):

yeah

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:12, on Zulip):

yeah, that's all Unprioritized I-nominated issues T-compiler

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:12, on Zulip):

I have an idea re. speeding up beta nominations...: we can cc t-compiler and do straw polls on the merged PR itself

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:12, on Zulip):

and then confirm on meeting

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:12, on Zulip):

hmm

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:13, on Zulip):

but do you want to do that async?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:13, on Zulip):

it could save time on uncontroversial ones

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:13, on Zulip):

you meant so people can vote before the meeting?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:14, on Zulip):

basically yes

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:14, on Zulip):

I think there's a lot of room for improvements here :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:14, on Zulip):

we can do a huge list of things

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:14, on Zulip):

about this particular one, I'd say cc @pnkfelix

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:14, on Zulip):

and @pnkfelix could come into pre-triage and basically say "oh, this is uncontroversial, and everyone is in favor, I will slap beta-accepted on it"

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:14, on Zulip):

given that he runs the meeting

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:19, on Zulip):

moved the discussion to a separate thread :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:20, on Zulip):

continuing with what's stated on #54818

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:20, on Zulip):

we have beta-regressions without P-label

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:22, on Zulip):

there's just one

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:22, on Zulip):

unpri beta reg 1/1: "help text for Send trait bound mismatch is misleading" #69983

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:23, on Zulip):

has PR

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:23, on Zulip):

yep

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:24, on Zulip):

what priority should we give to this one? :)

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:25, on Zulip):

does it matter? :D

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:25, on Zulip):

medium if we have to

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:25, on Zulip):

yep

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:25, on Zulip):

well the PR ... is not approved yet

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:26, on Zulip):

maybe reassign reviewer

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:29, on Zulip):

who in general reviews diagnostics issues when Esteban is the one making the PR :)

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:29, on Zulip):

me... please no :slight_smile:

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:31, on Zulip):

I can leave up to you assigning this one as a nice trade :)

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:34, on Zulip):

assigning myself as a backup reviewer then; might do it, but no promises

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:36, on Zulip):

there are no nightly-regressions without P-label

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:37, on Zulip):

from the tracking issue: "Also for pre-pass: I-nominated issues where the label should be removed (e.g. because it was discussed in the last meeting)."

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:38, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70041 has PR; unnominating

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:39, on Zulip):

yeah and none of those were discussed

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:39, on Zulip):

I was checking that

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:40, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/68132 uses a custom backend, though says it shouldn't matter, but hasn't been reproduced lately

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:40, on Zulip):

centril said:

https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70041 has PR; unnominating

for the record this https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/70051 is the PR and it's already r+ed

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:40, on Zulip):

author implies issue should be closed?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:40, on Zulip):

checking that one ...

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:41, on Zulip):

that was @bjorn3, I guess I'd close it

DPC (Mar 18 2020 at 20:41, on Zulip):

ja the issue will be closed by the PR

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:42, on Zulip):

@DPC what do you mean?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:42, on Zulip):

Santiago Pastorino said:

that was bjorn3, I guess I'd close it

done

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:42, on Zulip):

last issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70117

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:42, on Zulip):

rustc segfault #70117

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:42, on Zulip):

It's a rather big codebase, will paste a link later on.

not actionable atm

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:43, on Zulip):

we should ping llvm group once that changes

DPC (Mar 18 2020 at 20:44, on Zulip):

what do you mean?

The PR is r+'d so it will close the issue on being merged :slight_smile:

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:44, on Zulip):

ahh yes

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:44, on Zulip):

we were talking about the next one that's why I was confused

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:45, on Zulip):

about #70117, how do we keep track?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:45, on Zulip):

next time we triage or if someone watches the issue before

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:45, on Zulip):

I guess I'd leave nomination until we have info so at some point we can see that?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:45, on Zulip):

whatever comes first

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:45, on Zulip):

yes, keep nomination

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:46, on Zulip):

ahh you added nomination, sorry, thought you removed it :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:47, on Zulip):

next I-BetaNominated T-compiler

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:47, on Zulip):

second PR already accepted

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:47, on Zulip):

t-release will take care of backport

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:47, on Zulip):

first one, https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/70058 is mine

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:47, on Zulip):

beta nom 1/2: "can_begin_literal_or_bool: true on "-"? lit NTs." #70058

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:48, on Zulip):

I broke it, I fix it :slight_smile:

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:49, on Zulip):

:)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:49, on Zulip):

so you meant we shouldn't do anything here?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:49, on Zulip):

well; with async beta-nominations, this would have been a perfect example of "probably uncontroversial"

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:49, on Zulip):

the other one is more clear given it's merged

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 20:50, on Zulip):

with the current system, there's nothing to do on this mtg

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 20:55, on Zulip):

yep

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:13, on Zulip):

sorry I'm back

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:13, on Zulip):

I-StableNominated T-compiler

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:14, on Zulip):

empty :)

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:14, on Zulip):

yay

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:14, on Zulip):

Waiting for our team also wmpty

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:15, on Zulip):

then we have 54 P-high T-compiler and 32 of those are unassigned

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:18, on Zulip):

we have 5 stable to beta regressions

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:19, on Zulip):

one is P-high but assigned to you @centril

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:20, on Zulip):

only https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/69130 and https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/68855 are ones we have not triaged today

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:40, on Zulip):

@centril should we?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:40, on Zulip):

sorry but I have been really distracted today with covid-19

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:40, on Zulip):

@Santiago Pastorino ...triage them?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:40, on Zulip):

yes

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:40, on Zulip):

sure why not

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:41, on Zulip):

internal compiler error: "byte index 4 is not a char boundary" #69130

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:41, on Zulip):

@Esteban K├╝ber ^---

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:41, on Zulip):

priority seems right

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:42, on Zulip):

:+1:

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:42, on Zulip):

probably some span hackery there

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:42, on Zulip):

something something BytePos

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:46, on Zulip):

:+1:

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:47, on Zulip):

still that one is already P-medium

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:47, on Zulip):

I think it may be important to go over the P-high we didn't yet

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 18 2020 at 21:47, on Zulip):

right?

centril (Mar 18 2020 at 21:49, on Zulip):

sure

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:01, on Zulip):

@WG-prioritization I'm going to polish the agenda here

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:01, on Zulip):

if someone is around and want to participate more than welcome

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:31, on Zulip):

here is the agenda

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:32, on Zulip):

@centril a couple of things, this one https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/70120 showed up after we've done the traige yesterday, I guess we could triage quickly

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:32, on Zulip):

and also, maybe we can add more stuff to the agenda

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:32, on Zulip):

I'm going over P-high issues to see if there's something to discuss on some of them

centril (Mar 19 2020 at 13:32, on Zulip):

its probably a dupe of some other higher ranked thing :D

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:33, on Zulip):

if you or any other on the group have ideas of things to discuss please share here

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:35, on Zulip):

@centril we could totally tag as P-high I think

centril (Mar 19 2020 at 13:35, on Zulip):

sure

centril (Mar 19 2020 at 13:36, on Zulip):

I doubt it will be fixed soon though

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:36, on Zulip):

should we remove nomination?

centril (Mar 19 2020 at 13:36, on Zulip):

might want to raise in mtg

centril (Mar 19 2020 at 13:36, on Zulip):

maybe someone is familiar

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:36, on Zulip):

now it's time to nominate some stuff ... yes

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:36, on Zulip):

we need some nominations for discussion now

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:36, on Zulip):

it's the only one we have

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:37, on Zulip):

going over the list of P-high

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:39, on Zulip):

if there's some P-high issue of notice someone want to discuss please let me know

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 19 2020 at 13:46, on Zulip):

to be honest couldn't find more stuff that's obvious we should discuss

Last update: Jun 05 2020 at 21:15UTC