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

Properly handle postfix inc/dec in standalone and subexpr scenarios #104875

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 14, 2022

Conversation

chenyukang
Copy link
Member

Fixes #104867
r? @estebank

@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 25, 2022
Comment on lines 295 to 302
let prev_is_semi = {
if let Ok(prev_code) = self.sess.source_map().span_to_prev_source(lhs.span) &&
prev_code.trim_end().ends_with(";") {
true
} else {
false
}
};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a bit of a hack, but fair given where it lives. I would like to do a perf run of an alternative approach: modify lhs to hold a starts_statement: bool field. I think that it might hit memory a bit, but that would be far less brittle to refactors breaking this heuristic. Would you have time to try doing that as part of this PR?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You means add a field with boolean type to LhsExpr type?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updated the code.
I don't think there is a perf regerssion here, we are at error report codepath,
but you may have a double-check.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, maybe cost a little bit more memory.

--> $DIR/issue-104867-inc-dec-2.rs:18:18
|
LL | let _ = i + i++;
| ^^ not a valid postfix operator
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the hardest case to handle well, so I removed the suggestion for this scenario.
There maybe a solution to get it right, I think it may not worth to do it.

@estebank
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 12, 2022

📌 Commit ded10a1 has been approved by estebank

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 Dec 12, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 14, 2022

⌛ Testing commit ded10a1 with merge 309c469...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 14, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: estebank
Pushing 309c469 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Dec 14, 2022
@bors bors merged commit 309c469 into rust-lang:master Dec 14, 2022
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.68.0 milestone Dec 14, 2022
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (309c469): 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)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-3.4% [-3.6%, -3.2%] 2
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.1% [-2.1%, -2.1%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) -3.4% [-3.6%, -3.2%] 2

Cycles

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

Aaron1011 pushed a commit to Aaron1011/rust that referenced this pull request Jan 6, 2023
…estebank

Properly handle postfix inc/dec in standalone and subexpr scenarios

Fixes rust-lang#104867
r? `@estebank`
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.

postfix_increment show both type of suggestion for single statement
5 participants