Skip to content

Conversation

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

@GuillaumeGomez GuillaumeGomez commented Jan 15, 2026

Follow-up of #150934.

It removes the Option<> wrapping for SharedContext::target field and completely removed the target_id field. Considering this type contains a closure and never updates its target_id field, there is no need to keep it around, it can be used directly in the lint emitter.

r? @JonathanBrouwer

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Jan 15, 2026

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_attr_parsing

cc @jdonszelmann, @JonathanBrouwer

@rustbot rustbot added A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) 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 Jan 15, 2026
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member Author

I don't expect any perf change but just in case:

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jan 15, 2026
@rust-bors

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 15, 2026
@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 15, 2026

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: fb50715 (fb507154de75738e8d91f27a9e5fad530a7354dc, parent: a6acf0f07f0ed1c12e26dc0db3b9bf1d0504a0bb)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (fb50715): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.4% [-0.5%, -0.2%] 4
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

Cycles

Results (secondary 2.2%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.2% [2.2%, 2.2%] 1
Improvements ✅
(primary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) - - 0

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 473.873s -> 473.523s (-0.07%)
Artifact size: 383.59 MiB -> 383.57 MiB (-0.01%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Jan 15, 2026
@JonathanBrouwer
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+ rollup=never
Rollup=never for perf

@rust-bors
Copy link
Contributor

rust-bors bot commented Jan 16, 2026

📌 Commit 8205792 has been approved by JonathanBrouwer

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@rust-bors rust-bors bot 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 Jan 16, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) 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.

4 participants