Introduce autoXXX keys for target auto-discovery #5335

dwijnand · 2018-04-10T08:29:51Z

In Rust 2015 absence of the configuration makes it default to not include auto-discovered targets (i.e false), with a warnings message.

In Rust 2018 absence makes it default to include auto-discovered targets (i.e true).

Fixes #5330

original

Fixes #5330

submitted for early review. feedback very welcome, I'm happy to iterate (and learn).

in particular I require assistance with the borrowing of warnings in clean_benches.

rust-highfive · 2018-04-10T08:30:01Z

r? @alexcrichton

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

dwijnand · 2018-04-10T08:31:35Z

oh, also I'm only testing examples at the moment. is that sufficient? if not how should I further test this?

alexcrichton · 2018-04-10T18:40:50Z

Awesome, thanks for this! I think yeah we'll probably want tests for at least one type of target, but it's fine to not need tests for all of them.

I"m nto sure that autodiscovery is in the right location though as it's sort of a project-level distinction rather than a per-target distinction. Perhaps we could have keys like auto-examples = false inside the [package] section?

As we discussed on the other PR as well I think we'll want to start issuing warnings in the 2015 epoch if we'd like to message this out as part of the 2018 release

dwijnand · 2018-04-10T19:41:58Z

I think yeah we'll probably want tests for at least one type of target, but it's fine to not need tests for all of them.

Do you mean you want one more? I've already got one test for the examples target.

I"m nto sure that autodiscovery is in the right location though as it's sort of a project-level distinction rather than a per-target distinction. Perhaps we could have keys like auto-examples = false inside the [package] section?

I'll give that a shot, see how it sits.

As we discussed on in other PR as well I think we'll want to start issuing warnings in the 2015 epoch if we'd like to message this out as part of the 2018 release

👍

Any tips to resolve my borrowchecker woes?

alexcrichton · 2018-04-10T20:25:05Z

Oh oops sorry I meant at least two types of targets!

I'm on my phone but I'll check back for the borrow checker when I'm back at a computer

alexcrichton · 2018-04-10T21:53:29Z

src/cargo/util/toml/targets.rs

+        edition,
+        // FIXME: cannot borrow `*warnings` as mutable because previous closure requires unique access
+        // warnings,
+        &mut vec![],


Could a temporary vector be allocated here and then appended to warnings outside the scope of the closure above?

thanks! ideally I'd want the other way (e.g legacy_path_warnings), but I can't get it to work.

bors · 2018-04-12T00:29:18Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #5348) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

dwijnand · 2018-04-12T05:24:03Z

Please resolve the merge conflicts.

by merging or rebasing?

matklad · 2018-04-12T08:48:58Z

@dwijnand I personally slightly prefer rebasing, but in general I don't think we care a lot about history :)

bors · 2018-04-16T15:59:50Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #5360) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

dwijnand · 2018-04-16T22:26:30Z

this is ready for review.

I believe it now implements the desired behaviour discussed in #5330 (and here).

feedback always welcome :)

alexcrichton

This is looking fantastic @dwijnand, thanks so much!

To summary to make sure I understand, we've got a bunch new keys under [package] like autobins = true which in 2018 default to true and in 2015 default to true if no [[bin]] is specified or false otherwise. In 2015 if autobins = false implicitly and we would have otherwise inferred a new target we issue a warning. Does that sound right?

Could you add some tests for autoXXX = false and the warning being disabled? Also, could the documentation in src/doc be updated with the new manifest keys?

alexcrichton · 2018-04-17T15:29:24Z

src/cargo/util/toml/targets.rs

+                            "No auto-discovered {target_kind_human} targets included \
+                             because at least one explicit [[{target_kind}]] section was added to Cargo.toml. \
+                             Define the auto-discovery option for targets of this type, \
+                             and beware that in Rust 2018 edition the default will flip to `true`.",


Could this perhaps be reworded to:

An explicit [[{section}]] section is specified in Cargo.toml which currently disables Cargo from automatically inferring what other [[{section}]] targets would be. Disabling this inference behavior will change in the Rust 2018 edition and the following files will be included as a [[{section}]] target:

src/bin/foo.rs

src/bin/baz.rs

This is likely to break cargo build or cargo test as these files may not be ready to be compiled as a {{section}} target today. You can future-proof yourself and disable this warning by adding auto{{section}} = false to your [package] section. You may also move the files to a location where Cargo would not automatically infer them to be a target, such as in subfolders.

For more information on this warning you can consult https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/NUMBER

alexcrichton · 2018-04-17T15:29:54Z

tests/testsuite/bench.rs

@@ -444,6 +444,7 @@ fn bench_with_lib_dep() {
            name = "foo"
            version = "0.0.1"
            authors = []
+            autobins = true


Where autoXXX = true was added to the test suite could the files be reorganized a bit to not trigger the warning or need the key?

let me have a look.

alexcrichton · 2018-04-17T15:31:55Z

tests/testsuite/run.rs

+        "#,
+        );
+
+    if cargotest::is_nightly() {


This I believe can be avoided with masquerade_as_nightly_cargo() for Cargo, and there should be one #[test] function per test (so split this function into two).

This test may still need to be at the top of the function though because --edition doesn't exist on stable rustc, but it'll just be a prelude to all these tests.

actually can you explain again, please? the only part I'm clear on is splitting the test.

what I'm testing here is:

in rust nightly + cargo edition feature + edition 2018 => the inferred examples/a.rs isn't dropped in the presence of a declared "do_magic" example

in rust stable (and therefore edition 2015) => the presence of a declared "do_magic" example, and the lack of an autoXXX, causes the inferred examples/a.rs to be dropped, therefore causing a warning and the cargo run --example a to fail

Oh sure yeah, so the way I see this test case is that there's actually two test cases internally and it's dynamically dispatched depending on rustc. I'd prefer to to split this out into two separate test cases where they may just be skipped entirely for nightly Rust

dwijnand · 2018-04-18T00:08:02Z

thanks for the review @alexcrichton.

I've been working on this offline to get the test suite to pass - the commits I just pushed should CI go green now. I'm still stumbling my way to compiling and test-passing code, so please let me know if you spot any eye-soars or the like.

To summary to make sure I understand, we've got a bunch new keys under [package] like autobins = true which in 2018 default to true and in 2015 default to true if no [[bin]] is specified or false otherwise. In 2015 if autobins = false implicitly and we would have otherwise inferred a new target we issue a warning. Does that sound right?

it's hard to reason about this in terms of "default" because there are so many input variables. my attempt to summarise would be:

in 2015 you get a warning if you're dropping inferred targets
in 2018 you don't drop them, and therefore don't get a warning
with autoXXX you can specify whether to drop or not inferred targets (with false and true, respectively)

alexcrichton · 2018-04-18T15:23:45Z

Ok sounds great!

and fix a typo in the error message

dwijnand · 2018-04-20T18:48:16Z

hey @alexcrichton, I think I've covered everything.

sorry for the force push but I think you'll find it easier to review this way (instead of the crazy git history tale of my progress to the end zone).

please let me know, happy to iterate with your feedback.

In Rust 2015 absence of the configuration makes it default to not include auto-discovered targets (i.e false), with a warnings message. In Rust 2018 absence makes it default to include auto-discovered targets (i.e true). Fixes #5330

dwijnand · 2018-04-20T20:22:08Z

I thought I had understood that [/] is precisely to handle unix/windows paths, and yet...

  2 - |* "[..]foo[/]benches[/]bench_basic.rs"|
    + |* "C:\\projects\\cargo\\target\\cit\\t114\\foo\\benches\\bench_basic.rs"|

  2 - |* "[..]foo[/]examples[/]a.rs"|
    + |* "C:\\projects\\cargo\\target\\cit\\t952\\foo\\examples\\a.rs"|

what am I missing?

alexcrichton · 2018-04-20T20:41:40Z

Hm, weird! I would have thought those would be working assertions as well... In any case it's fine to just use [..]bench_basic.rs as the assertion and not worry too much about whatever bug may be happening here

alexcrichton

Thanks again so much for working on this! Just a few small remaining nits

alexcrichton · 2018-04-20T20:47:59Z

src/cargo/util/toml/targets.rs

+                                "\
+An explicit [[{section}]] section is specified in Cargo.toml which currently disables Cargo from \
+automatically inferring other {target_kind_human} targets. This inference behavior will change in \
+the Rust 2018 edition and the following files will be included as a {target_kind_human} target:


When using string literals for warnings in Cargo I've historically preferred to have manual line wrapping at 80 characters at that tends to be a good default at least for most terminals to display well. That'd just involve wrapping here along with removing the \ at the end of the lines

alexcrichton · 2018-04-20T20:48:11Z

src/cargo/util/toml/targets.rs

+{rem_targets_str}
+This is likely to break cargo build or cargo test as these files may not be ready to be compiled \
+as a {target_kind_human} target today. You can future-proof yourself and disable this warning by \
+adding {autodiscover_flag_name} = false to your [package] section. You may also move the files to \


Could the autofoo = false be surrounded by backticks here?

alexcrichton · 2018-04-20T20:48:46Z

src/cargo/util/toml/targets.rs

+                            let mut rem_targets_str = String::new();
+                            for t in rem_targets.iter() {
+                                if let Some(p) = t.path.clone() {
+                                    rem_targets_str.push_str(&format!("* {:?}\n", p.0))


I'd recommend using p.0.display() here instead fo {:?} to avoid the extraneous quotes

alexcrichton · 2018-04-20T20:56:01Z

I've updated #5330 with the current state of this proposal as well. @rust-lang/cargo now would be a good time to review that issue's description and make sure you're ok with it!

dwijnand · 2018-04-20T21:25:06Z

that should be everything. thanks, the docs in #5330 look great.

do you think the docs for the manifest keys in reference guide are sufficient?

matklad · 2018-04-21T08:02:24Z

src/cargo/util/toml/targets.rs

+
+    let targets = {
+        let mut legacy_bench_path = |bench: &TomlTarget| {
+            let legacy_path = package_root.join("src").join("bench.rs");


A nice thing to do in the next PR would be to add if edition != Edition::Edition2015 { return None; } over here!

ah, this must be one of the instances of "backwards compatibility baggage" you originally referred to in #5330.

sure!

alexcrichton · 2018-04-21T16:10:09Z

@dwijnand ah yeah the docs are good for now, we can always expand later if necessary!

@bors: r+

bors · 2018-04-21T16:10:11Z

📌 Commit ab5ac28 has been approved by alexcrichton

bors · 2018-04-21T16:10:19Z

⌛ Testing commit ab5ac28 with merge fd3be77...

Introduce autoXXX keys for target auto-discovery In Rust 2015 absence of the configuration makes it default to not include auto-discovered targets (i.e false), with a warnings message. In Rust 2018 absence makes it default to include auto-discovered targets (i.e true). Fixes #5330 --- _original_ Fixes #5330 submitted for early review. feedback very welcome, I'm happy to iterate (and learn). in particular I require assistance with the borrowing of `warnings` in `clean_benches`.

bors · 2018-04-21T16:32:07Z

☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis
Approved by: alexcrichton
Pushing fd3be77 to master...

ehuss · 2018-04-21T21:53:01Z

Just FYI, building cargo with itself now displays this message. 😄

warning: An explicit [[bin]] section is specified in Cargo.toml which currently
disables Cargo from automatically inferring other binary targets.
This inference behavior will change in the Rust 2018 edition and the following
files will be included as a binary target:

* /Users/eric/Proj/rust/cargo/src/bin/cli.rs
* /Users/eric/Proj/rust/cargo/src/bin/command_prelude.rs

@matklad

Drop legacy path support under Rust edition 2018 (or later) builds on #5335 submitted for early feedback: wdyt @matklad? is this what you had in mind? what should change? what should be added? how should we test this? is the current (2015) messaging enough to drop it in 2018? r? @matklad

fix(toml): Warn, rather than fail publish, if a target is excluded ### What does this PR try to resolve? We have a couple of problems with publishing - Inconsistent errors: if a target that `package` doesn't verify is missing `path`, it will error, while one with `path` won't, see #13456 - Users may want to exclude targets and their choices are - Go ahead and include them. I originally excluded my examples before doc-scraping was a think. The problem was if I had to set `required-features`, I then could no longer exclude them - Muck with `Cargo.toml` during publish and pass `--allow-dirty` This fixes both by auto-stripping targets on publish. We will warn the user that we did so. This is a mostly-one-way door on behavior because we are turning an error case into a warning. For the most part, I think this is the right thing to do. My biggest regret is that the warning is only during `package`/`publish` as it will be too late to act on it and people who want to know will want to know when the problem is introduced. The error is also very late in the process but at least its before a non-reversible action has been taken. Dry-run and `yank` help. Fixes #13456 Fixes #5806 ### How should we test and review this PR? Tests are added in the first commit and you can then follow the commits to see how the test output evolved. The biggest risk factors for this change are - If the target-stripping logic mis-identifies a path as excluded because of innocuous path differences (e.g. case) - Setting a minimum MSRV for published packages: `auto*` were added in 1.27 (#5335) but were insta-stable. `autobins = false` did nothing until 1.32 (#6329). I have not checked to see how this behaves pre-1.32 or pre-1.27. Since my memory of that error is vague, I believe it will either do a redundant discovery *or* it will implicitly skip discovery Resolved risks - #13729 ensured our generated target paths don't have `\` in them - #13729 ensures the paths are normalize so the list of packaged paths For case-insensitive filesystems, I added tests to show the original behavior (works locally but will fail when depended on from a case-sensitive filesystem) and tracked how that changed with this PR (on publish warn that those targets are stripped). We could try to normalize the case but it will also follow symlinks and is likely indicative of larger casing problems that the user had. Weighing how broken things are now , it didn't seem changing behavior on this would be too big of a deal. We should do a Call for Testing when this hits nightly to have people to `cargo package` and look for targets exclusion warnings that don't make sense. ### Additional information This builds on #13701 and the work before it. By enumerating all targets in `Cargo.toml`, it makes it so rust-lang/crates.io#5882 and rust-lang/crates.io#814 can be implemented without any other filesystem interactions. A follow up PR is need to make much of a difference in performance because we unconditionally walk the file system just in case `autodiscover != Some(false)` or a target is missing a `path`. We cannot turn off auto-discovery of libs, so that will always be done for bin-only packages.

rust-highfive assigned alexcrichton Apr 10, 2018

dwijnand changed the title ~~Introduce {target}.autodiscovery to opt out after 2018 Fixes #5330~~ Introduce {target}.autodiscovery to opt out after 2018 Apr 10, 2018

dwijnand mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2018

Drop Option wrapper on Manifest target vecs #5336

Closed

alexcrichton reviewed Apr 10, 2018

View reviewed changes

dwijnand mentioned this pull request Apr 11, 2018

Make explicit opt-out of target discovery neccessary for Rust 2018 #5330

Closed

dwijnand changed the title ~~Introduce {target}.autodiscovery to opt out after 2018~~ Introduce target auto-discovery options Apr 16, 2018

alexcrichton reviewed Apr 17, 2018

View reviewed changes

dwijnand added 3 commits April 20, 2018 19:45

Move edition earlier in TomlManifest::to_real_manifest

6828380

and fix a typo in the error message

Increase scope nesting to borrow

ad60c60

Extract toml_targets_and_inferred & inferred_to_toml_targets

b61b6e7

dwijnand changed the title ~~Introduce target auto-discovery options~~ Introduce autoXXX keys for target auto-discovery Apr 20, 2018

Introduce autoXXX keys for target auto-discovery

e471745

In Rust 2015 absence of the configuration makes it default to not include auto-discovered targets (i.e false), with a warnings message. In Rust 2018 absence makes it default to include auto-discovered targets (i.e true). Fixes #5330

alexcrichton reviewed Apr 20, 2018

View reviewed changes

alexcrichton added the relnotes Release-note worthy label Apr 20, 2018

dwijnand added 4 commits April 20, 2018 22:20

avoid windows path assertion bug

abbd69e

prefer PathBuf::display over {:?}

54e7bc5

manually line wrap warnings at 80 characters

d3f5fef

backtick auto-discovery key usage advice

ab5ac28

matklad reviewed Apr 21, 2018

View reviewed changes

matklad approved these changes Apr 21, 2018

View reviewed changes

dwijnand mentioned this pull request Apr 21, 2018

Drop legacy path support under Rust edition 2018 (or later) #5398

Merged

bors merged commit ab5ac28 into rust-lang:master Apr 21, 2018

This was referenced Apr 21, 2018

Introduction of namespaced features (see #1286) #5300

Merged

Allow cfg(...)ing targets in Cargo.toml #5367

Closed

dwijnand deleted the target-autodiscovery branch April 21, 2018 18:12

ehuss added this to the 1.27.0 milestone Feb 6, 2022

epage mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2024

fix(toml): Warn, rather than fail publish, if a target is excluded #13713

Merged

Introduce autoXXX keys for target auto-discovery #5335

Introduce autoXXX keys for target auto-discovery #5335

Conversation

dwijnand commented Apr 10, 2018 • edited Loading

rust-highfive commented Apr 10, 2018

dwijnand commented Apr 10, 2018

alexcrichton commented Apr 10, 2018

dwijnand commented Apr 10, 2018

alexcrichton commented Apr 10, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

bors commented Apr 12, 2018

dwijnand commented Apr 12, 2018

matklad commented Apr 12, 2018

bors commented Apr 16, 2018

dwijnand commented Apr 16, 2018

alexcrichton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dwijnand Apr 18, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dwijnand commented Apr 18, 2018

alexcrichton commented Apr 18, 2018

dwijnand commented Apr 20, 2018

dwijnand commented Apr 20, 2018

alexcrichton commented Apr 20, 2018

alexcrichton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alexcrichton commented Apr 20, 2018

dwijnand commented Apr 20, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alexcrichton commented Apr 21, 2018

bors commented Apr 21, 2018

bors commented Apr 21, 2018

bors commented Apr 21, 2018

ehuss commented Apr 21, 2018

dwijnand commented Apr 10, 2018 •

edited

Loading

dwijnand Apr 18, 2018 •

edited

Loading