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

more work leading up to exchange allocation header removal #7521

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jul 1, 2013
Merged

more work leading up to exchange allocation header removal #7521

merged 4 commits into from
Jul 1, 2013

Conversation

thestinger
Copy link
Contributor

continued from #7495

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 1, 2013
@bors bors closed this Jul 1, 2013
@bors bors merged commit 5b40f2a into rust-lang:master Jul 1, 2013
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2013
This is work continued from the now landed #7495 and #7521 pulls.

Removing the headers from unique vectors is another project, so I've separated the allocator.
flip1995 pushed a commit to flip1995/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 3, 2021
…g, r=camsteffen

lintcheck always copies in a fresh crate when provided with a crate path

changelog: none

When lintcheck is run on local crates it copies the crate to `target/lintcheck/sources/crate_name` on the first run only.
Then in subsequent runs of lintcheck it reuses this same copy.
This caching behaviour makes sense when dealing with immutable crates.io releases and git commits.
However it is quite surprising that the changes to my local crate are not used when I run lintcheck.

To fix this I removed the copy, instead clippy runs directly off the provided crate folder.
I have tested this and have not observed any negative effects from doing this.
But maybe i'm missing something as im not familiar with clippy!

Alternatively we could make it copy the entire crate every run, but that seems problematic to me as multi-gigabyte target folders will take a long time to copy and wear down SSDs for developers who frequently run lintcheck.
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.

2 participants