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

Add pretty-printer parenthesis insertion test #133730

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 2, 2024
Merged

Conversation

dtolnay
Copy link
Member

@dtolnay dtolnay commented Dec 2, 2024

This test demonstrates numerous bugs in rustc_ast_pretty, including all five of:

  • Failing to insert parentheses where necessary to preserve the meaning of a syntax tree, producing invalid syntax.
  • Failing to insert parentheses, producing valid syntax with the wrong meaning.
  • Inserting too many parentheses.
  • Inserting parentheses in the wrong place, producing invalid syntax.
  • Losing syntactically significant parts of the syntax tree.

These pretty-printer bugs have consequences for -Zunpretty=expanded. The cargo expand subcommand cannot work reliably unless rustc can consistently produce valid Rust output. Erroneous syntax cannot be passed through rustfmt, or queried with syn-select.

The test in this PR is a port of a test from Syn that tests the automatic parenthesis insertion performed by Syn's ToTokens impls. In Syn we actually run this test over every expression in every Rust source file in the whole rust-lang/rust repo, including rustc and the standard library and tools and test suites. For the test here, I have only used a small selection of interesting expressions. This will serve as an easy spot to accumulate regression tests as the various bugs get fixed. Once rustc's pretty-printer is in better shape, it's possible that the test can be expanded to cover a larger set of expressions collected automatically like in Syn.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Dec 2, 2024

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

rustbot has assigned @Mark-Simulacrum.
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 Dec 2, 2024
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@dtolnay dtolnay added the A-pretty Area: Pretty printing (including `-Z unpretty`) label Dec 2, 2024
@compiler-errors
Copy link
Member

r? compiler-errors @bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Dec 2, 2024

📌 Commit 267dcb2 has been approved by compiler-errors

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 2, 2024
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2024
…llaumeGomez

Rollup of 13 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#133603 (Eliminate magic numbers from expression precedence)
 - rust-lang#133715 (rustdoc-json: Include safety of `static`s)
 - rust-lang#133721 (rustdoc-json: Add test for `impl Trait for dyn Trait`)
 - rust-lang#133725 (Remove `//@ compare-output-lines-by-subset`)
 - rust-lang#133730 (Add pretty-printer parenthesis insertion test)
 - rust-lang#133736 (Add `needs-target-has-atomic` directive)
 - rust-lang#133739 (Re-add myself to rotation)
 - rust-lang#133743 (Fix docs for `<[T]>::as_array`.)
 - rust-lang#133744 (Fix typo README.md)
 - rust-lang#133745 (Remove static HashSet for default IDs list)
 - rust-lang#133749 (mir validator: don't store mir phase)
 - rust-lang#133751 (remove `Ty::is_copy_modulo_regions`)
 - rust-lang#133757 (`impl Default for EarlyDiagCtxt`)

r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
@bors bors merged commit 8f5a801 into rust-lang:master Dec 2, 2024
6 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.85.0 milestone Dec 2, 2024
rust-timer added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2024
Rollup merge of rust-lang#133730 - dtolnay:parentest, r=compiler-errors

Add pretty-printer parenthesis insertion test

This test demonstrates numerous bugs in rustc_ast_pretty, including all five of:

- Failing to insert parentheses where necessary to preserve the meaning of a syntax tree, producing invalid syntax.
- Failing to insert parentheses, producing valid syntax with the wrong meaning.
- Inserting too many parentheses.
- Inserting parentheses in the wrong place, producing invalid syntax.
- Losing syntactically significant parts of the syntax tree.

These pretty-printer bugs have consequences for `-Zunpretty=expanded`. The `cargo expand` subcommand cannot work reliably unless rustc can consistently produce valid Rust output. Erroneous syntax cannot be passed through rustfmt, or queried with [syn-select](https://crates.io/crates/syn-select).

The test in this PR is a port of a test from Syn that tests the automatic parenthesis insertion performed by Syn's `ToTokens` impls. In Syn we actually run this test over every expression in every Rust source file in the whole rust-lang/rust repo, including rustc and the standard library and tools and test suites. For the test here, I have only used a small selection of interesting expressions. This will serve as an easy spot to accumulate regression tests as the various bugs get fixed. Once rustc's pretty-printer is in better shape, it's possible that the test can be expanded to cover a larger set of expressions collected automatically like in Syn.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-pretty Area: Pretty printing (including `-Z unpretty`) 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.

6 participants