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

glib: Enable various smallvec features #1083

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 17, 2023

Conversation

sdroege
Copy link
Member

@sdroege sdroege commented Apr 17, 2023

This all require a newer rustc than what smallvec depends on, but much older than glib's minimum supported Rust version.

Enabling these features enables smallvec to use less space, work with any array size and provide some more const functions.


Another reason why conservative MSRV are the plague.

This all require a newer rustc than what smallvec depends on, but much
older than glib's minimum supported Rust version.

Enabling these features enables smallvec to use less space, work with
any array size and provide some more const functions.
@sdroege sdroege added the needs-backport PR needs backporting to the current stable branch label Apr 17, 2023
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Another reason why conservative MSRV are the plague.

Not sure what it has to do with the rest though.

@sdroege
Copy link
Member Author

sdroege commented Apr 17, 2023

Not sure what it has to do with the rest though.

Especially the union feature makes a quite big difference and should be enabled by default. That can't be done though if you want to support rustc from 3 years ago. And your software depending indirectly on smallvec will have no way to enable it explictly unless you depend directly on smallvec (even if you don't use it), assuming you even notice that there is this configuration somewhere in one of your dependencies.

@sdroege sdroege merged commit 0bac0df into gtk-rs:master Apr 17, 2023
@sdroege sdroege deleted the smallvec-features branch April 17, 2023 09:32
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Yes but it doesn't concern us so I'm really not sure to understand your point.

@sdroege
Copy link
Member Author

sdroege commented Apr 17, 2023

In this case we're directly depending on it, so we "only" need to be aware that this configuration exists in our direct dependency. Which nobody did for 2 years, or did you? :)

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Ok I just got it: you said it because you realized that these features that improved this crate greatly were disabled by default because of MSRV. Now it makes sense.

@sdroege
Copy link
Member Author

sdroege commented Apr 17, 2023

Sorry, I should've been more clear :) I had no breakfast yet!

@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Go eat young man!

@sdroege sdroege added backported PR was backported to the current stable branch and removed needs-backport PR needs backporting to the current stable branch labels May 31, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backported PR was backported to the current stable branch
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants