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.

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

target_features: explain what exacty 'implied' means here #132880

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 11, 2024

Conversation

RalfJung
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 10, 2024

r? @estebank

rustbot has assigned @estebank.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Nov 10, 2024
@RalfJung
Copy link
Member Author

I have tried a different wording, hopefully it is better now.

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

lgtm

@RalfJung
Copy link
Member Author

@workingjubilee is that a "r=me"?

@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

Ja, ich billige :^)

@RalfJung
Copy link
Member Author

RalfJung commented Nov 11, 2024 via email

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 11, 2024

📌 Commit 2c7f3ba has been approved by workingjubilee

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 Nov 11, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 11, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 2c7f3ba with merge b69f62f...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Nov 11, 2024
…jubilee

target_features: explain what exacty 'implied' means here
@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

A job failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 11, 2024

💔 Test failed - checks-actions

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Nov 11, 2024
@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

seems spurious?

@bors retry

@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 Nov 11, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 11, 2024

⌛ Testing commit 2c7f3ba with merge 71042b4...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Nov 11, 2024

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: workingjubilee
Pushing 71042b4 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Nov 11, 2024
@bors bors merged commit 71042b4 into rust-lang:master Nov 11, 2024
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.84.0 milestone Nov 11, 2024
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (71042b4): comparison URL.

Overall result: no relevant changes - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

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

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

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

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 786.407s -> 787.302s (0.11%)
Artifact size: 335.32 MiB -> 335.27 MiB (-0.02%)

@kadenlnelson
Copy link
Contributor

I wanted to make the connection to the standard contraposition principle explicit. Not sure how to do that in any other style. ;)

Thanks for entertaining our nit picks on comments.

What I mentioned earlier is a sentiment that comments should explain what code cannot. If the comment is code-like, then it should be code.

I'm being idealistic here, I'm not asking you to refactor code. What you've added in this PR achieves the desired intent. I'm curious if you agree that code-like comments are a sign that the code itself isn't clear enough to describe what it's doing to the reader.

@RalfJung
Copy link
Member Author

RalfJung commented Nov 11, 2024

I don't think my comment was code-like. It was a comment on the level of mathematical logic, which -- in this case -- is at a higher level of abstraction than the code. Maybe you consider that code-like in the sense of being a formal language, but I think a comment that explains low-level code in terms of a higher-level formal language can be quite valuable.

@RalfJung RalfJung deleted the implied-features branch November 11, 2024 20:52
@workingjubilee
Copy link
Member

workingjubilee commented Nov 11, 2024

I also do not think it was a "code-like comment", or certainly it seemed just as well to have a different phrasing.

My remark was only because the sequences of starts-and-stops, plus an aside, made puzzling out the meaning, while possible, slightly nonintuitive.

Kind of like that sentence, actually.

mati865 pushed a commit to mati865/rust that referenced this pull request Nov 12, 2024
…jubilee

target_features: explain what exacty 'implied' means here
@kadenlnelson
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think my comment was code-like. It was a comment on the level of mathematical logic, which -- in this case -- is at a higher level of abstraction than the code. Maybe you consider that code-like in the sense of being a formal language, but I think a comment that explains low-level code in terms of a higher-level formal language can be quite valuable.

Interesting, I see your perspective now that you put it that way 🙂

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants