compiletest: Pass around DirectiveLine instead of bare strings
#147170
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This isn't actually used for anything, and its presence complicates the migration to `DirectiveLine`.
|
Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest cc @jieyouxu |
rustbot
added
A-compiletest
|
|
jieyouxu
approved these changes
Oct 1, 2025
Comment on lines
+108
to
+109
| /// Split off from the main `parse_name_value_directive`, so that improvements | ||
| /// to directive handling aren't held back by debuginfo test commands. |
Comment on lines
-1120
to
-1122
| fn parse_negative_name_directive(&self, line: &str, directive: &str) -> bool { | ||
| line.starts_with("no-") && self.parse_name_directive(&line[3..], directive) | ||
| } |
|
@bors r+ rollup |
bors
added
S-waiting-on-bors
This was referenced Oct 1, 2025
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 1, 2025
Rollup of 11 pull requests Successful merges: - #146918 (add regression test) - #146980 (simplify setup_constraining_predicates, and note it is potentially cubic) - #147170 (compiletest: Pass around `DirectiveLine` instead of bare strings) - #147180 (add tests) - #147188 (Remove usage of `compiletest-use-stage0-libtest` from CI) - #147189 (Replace `rustc_span::Span` with a stripped down version for librustdoc's highlighter) - #147199 (remove outdated comment in (inner) `InferCtxt`) - #147200 (Fix autodiff empty ret regression) - #147209 (Remove `no-remap-src-base` from tests) - #147213 (Fix broken STD build for ESP-IDF) - #147217 (Don't create a top-level `true` directory when running UI tests) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 1, 2025
Rollup merge of #147170 - Zalathar:directive, r=jieyouxu compiletest: Pass around `DirectiveLine` instead of bare strings This is an incremental step towards being able to clean up and centralize compiletest directive parsing. My original plan was to add features to `DirectiveLine`, and then gradually migrate parsing code to use those features. However, that turned out to be impractical, because of how the existing directive parsers call each other. So instead this PR focuses on getting them to all take `DirectiveLine` instead of bare strings, to enable incremental work in the future. Because this is part of an ongoing cleanup, I've prioritised clean diffs over nice code, because much of this code is going to be modified again when `DirectiveLine` is more capable. r? jieyouxu
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
matthiaskrgr
added a commit
to matthiaskrgr/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 5, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 5, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 5, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 5, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
Zalathar
added a commit
to Zalathar/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 5, 2025
compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to rust-lang#147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
rust-timer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 5, 2025
Rollup merge of #147288 - Zalathar:directive, r=jieyouxu compiletest: Make `DirectiveLine` responsible for name/value splitting - Follow-up to #147170. --- Now that all of the directive-parsing functions have access to a `DirectiveLine`, we can move all of the ad-hoc name/value splitting code into `DirectiveLine` itself, making directive parsing simpler and more consistent. The first commit is just moving code into a submodule, so the actual changes can be seen in the subsequent commits. r? jieyouxu
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is an incremental step towards being able to clean up and centralize compiletest directive parsing.
My original plan was to add features to
DirectiveLine, and then gradually migrate parsing code to use those features. However, that turned out to be impractical, because of how the existing directive parsers call each other. So instead this PR focuses on getting them to all takeDirectiveLineinstead of bare strings, to enable incremental work in the future.Because this is part of an ongoing cleanup, I've prioritised clean diffs over nice code, because much of this code is going to be modified again when
DirectiveLineis more capable.r? jieyouxu