fix: proc-macro example from dep no longer affects feature resolution #13892
+66
−6
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Previously when checking if a dependency is a proc-macro, the v2 feature resolve resolver v2 looks for `proc-macro = true` for every target of the dependency. However, it's impossible to depend on a non-lib target as a proc-macro. This fix switches to only check if `proc-macro = true` for `[lib]` target for a dependency.
rustbot
added
A-dependency-resolution
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR try to resolve?
Previously when checking if a dependency is a proc-macro,
the v2 feature resolve resolver v2 looks for
proc-macro = truefor every target of the dependency.
However, it's impossible to depend on a non-lib target as a proc-macro.
This fix switches to only check if
proc-macro = truefor[lib]target for a dependency.
Fixes #13726.
How should we test and review this PR?
Best reviewed commit-by-commit.
Additional information
I didn't really fix the discrepancy between the behavior of example lib and the documentation, which was mentioned in #13726 (comment).
Thanks @torhovland for the minimal test case.