Skip to content

Sync from rust 2025/05/21 #682

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

Open
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Sync from rust 2025/05/21 #682

wants to merge 10 commits into from

Conversation

antoyo
Copy link
Contributor

@antoyo antoyo commented May 21, 2025

No description provided.

GuillaumeGomez and others added 10 commits May 14, 2025 13:51
make `rustc_attr_parsing` less dominant in the rustc crate graph

It has/had a glob re-export of `rustc_attr_data_structures`, which is a crate much lower in the graph, and a lot of crates were using it *just* (or *mostly*) for that re-export, while they can rely on `rustc_attr_data_structures` directly.

Previous graph:
![graph_1](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/f4a5f13c-4222-4903-b56d-28c83511fcbd)

Graph with this PR:
![graph_2](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/1e053d9c-75cc-402b-84df-86229c98277a)

The first commit keeps the re-export, and just changes the dependency if possible. The second commit is the "breaking change" which removes the re-export, and "explicitly" adds the `rustc_attr_data_structures` dependency where needed. It also switches over some src/tools/*.

The second commit is actually a lot more involved than I expected. Please let me know if it's a better idea to back it out and just keep the first commit.
@antoyo antoyo force-pushed the sync_from_rust_2025_05_21 branch from f65af17 to f1d5cfe Compare May 24, 2025 16:05
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants