Rename splat to avoid stable name collisions

[teor2345]

View all comments

Tracking issue: #153629

This PR renames #[splat] to #[rustc_splat], in a mostly automated way (using fastmod).

The rename commands I used were:

fastmod --fixed-strings '#[splat]' '#[rustc_splat]'
fastmod --fixed-strings '`splat` attribute' '`rustc_splat` attribute'
# I'm pretty sure the symbol demangling commands are no-ops on beta
# Legacy symbol demangling
fastmod --fixed-strings '$splat$' '$rustc_splat$'
# Revert some changes that aren't in rustc_demangle yet
fastmod 'v0(.*)#\[rustc_splat\]' 'v0${1}#[splat]' tests/ui/splat/splat-mangling.rs

Part of #159428

Backport Advice

Cherry-pick the first commit to the beta branch, then run the fastmod commands above.
I've tested this locally (with a slightly different name), and it works, see my splat-rename-beta branch.

Remaining Work

rustc_demangle needs an update to the attribute name, a release, and then a version bump in rust-lang/rust. I'll do that separately. It doesn't need to be backported, because the last version bump was after beta branched.

There's also some external code that needs updates, the full list is in the ticket: #159428 (comment)

@rustbot label +beta-nominated +A-attributes +A-macros +A-resolve +C-bug +F-splat +P-high +T-compiler

[rustbot]

The reflection data structures are tied exactly to the implementation
in the compiler. Make sure to also adjust rustc_const_eval/src/const_eval/type_info.rs

cc @oli-obk

This PR changes rustc_public

cc @oli-obk, @celinval, @ouz-a, @makai410

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_hir/src/attrs

cc @jdonszelmann, @JonathanBrouwer

rustfmt is developed in its own repository. If possible, consider making this change to rust-lang/rustfmt instead.

cc @rust-lang/rustfmt

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_attr_parsing

cc @jdonszelmann, @JonathanBrouwer

[teor2345]

No P-high for me!

@rustbot label +beta-nominated +A-attributes +A-macros +A-resolve +C-bug +F-splat +T-compiler

[jieyouxu]

FWIW we only assign P-* for issues not PRs; I'm happy to review the rename.
r? me

[apiraino]

I will "de-nominate" from backport as now it's a bit too early. Feel free to nominate again when the PR is reviewed and approved :)

@rustbot label -beta-nominated

[ytmimi]

Please restore src/tools/rustfmt/tests/source/reorder_modules/ZYXW/mod.rs, src/tools/rustfmt/tests/source/reorder_modules/ZYXW/mod.rs, src/tools/rustfmt/tests/target/reorder_modules/ABCD/mod.rs, src/tools/rustfmt/tests/target/reorder_modules/ZYXW/mod.rs

Removing these files is causing rustfmt test failures:

  thread '<unnamed>' (54612) panicked at src/tools/rustfmt/src/test/mod.rs:842:40:
  called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: ModuleResolutionError(ModuleResolutionError { module: "ZYXW", kind: NotFound { file: "tests/target/reorder_modules/ZYXW.rs" }

View changes since this review

[rustbot]

Reminder, once the PR becomes ready for a review, use @rustbot ready.

[rustbot]

This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

[jieyouxu]

Thanks, I did some grepping and didn't notice any stragglers modulo rustc_demangle case, as you mentioned.

(Also thanks for making it easy to review by breaking it into commits)

@bors r+ rollup=never p=1 (beta-backport)

View changes since this review

[rust-bors]

📌 Commit bc1bb27 has been approved by jieyouxu

It is now in the queue for this repository.

[jieyouxu]

@bors rollup=iffy (can be slightly conflict-prone)

[rustbot]

beta backport approved as per compiler team on Zulip. A backport PR will be authored by the release team at the end of the current development cycle. Backport labels are handled by them.

[rust-bors]

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: jieyouxu
Duration: 3h 16m 17s
Pushing 8ab9fdf to main...

[github-actions]

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing be3d26d (parent) -> 8ab9fdf (this PR)

Test differences

Show 2 test diffs

2 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard 8ab9fdff5a91b9f2b5ed57fb0275452d9a0d0280 --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

1. x86_64-rust-for-linux: 31m 15s -> 51m 22s (+64.4%)
2. x86_64-mingw-1: 1h 45m -> 2h 50m (+61.8%)
3. x86_64-gnu-gcc-core-tests: 8m 19s -> 12m 14s (+47.2%)
4. i686-gnu-nopt-2: 1h 37m -> 2h 12m (+35.2%)
5. dist-x86_64-msvc-alt: 2h 7m -> 2h 52m (+35.2%)
6. arm-android: 1h 15m -> 1h 41m (+35.0%)
7. i686-gnu-2: 1h 11m -> 1h 36m (+34.5%)
8. dist-powerpc-linux: 1h 12m -> 1h 33m (+28.5%)
9. dist-loongarch64-linux: 1h 26m -> 1h 51m (+28.4%)
10. dist-powerpc64-linux-gnu: 1h 15m -> 1h 35m (+27.3%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

[rust-timer]

Finished benchmarking commit (8ab9fdf): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -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)	0.4%	[0.4%, 0.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.3%	[-0.3%, -0.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary 0.4%, secondary 0.5%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	1.8%	[0.4%, 3.1%]	2
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.5%	[0.4%, 0.6%]	9
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.5%	[-0.5%, -0.4%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-0.5%, 3.1%]	5

Cycles

Results (primary -0.0%, secondary -2.3%)

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

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.7%	[0.6%, 0.8%]	4
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	2.3%	[0.7%, 4.4%]	8
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.0%	[-1.4%, -0.7%]	3
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-9.7%	[-18.8%, -0.4%]	5
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-1.4%, 0.8%]	7

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 489.155s -> 492.09s (0.60%)
Artifact size: 390.64 MiB -> 390.63 MiB (-0.00%)

[teor2345]

This is a pure rename, I think the benchmark changes are noise.