-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.5k
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
Implement weak dependency features. #8818
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Another possibility is to return an error here if the new resolver isn't enabled. Especially if the flag is intended to be tied to a manifest flag, we'll pobably want to return a first-class error instead of having a silent opt-in?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The new resolver is intended to be 100% identical to the old one, assuming none of the other options are enabled (like
decouple_host_deps
). The way I viewed this is that this is just an internal implementation detail that should be invisible and irrelevant to users. I considered using-Z features=weak
as the CLI interface, but the parsed flags aren't available fromConfig
orSummary
where they are needed. I could special-case it, but it seemed simpler just to have a single separate flag.The long-term stabilization plan here is that we just turn this on for everyone (set
new_resolver
andweak_dep_features
to TRUE by default, and eventually just remove them). There will be no opt-in to it, since it should be backwards compatible. The other resolver options will remain tied to theresolver = "2"
opt-in, but technically that will just turn on the other options (decouple_host_deps
and friends).Does that make sense? It does seem a bit confusing from the perspective of how it is implemented, but from the perspective of the user, it is more about opting-in to backwards-incompatible changes. The
resolver
opt-in is about the user's perception of things being different, and less about how it is actually implemented.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh right sorry I keep equating "new resolver" with all the new features (like
decouple_host_deps
). I forgot that the new resolver also implements the old logic! In that case this seems fine and agreed this should be a silent switch!