-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
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
core::error
, no_std
#304
core::error
, no_std
#304
Conversation
* master: Release 1.0.61 Format PR 299 with rustfmt also {std -> core}::panic::UnwindSafe use core::fmt instead of std::fmt
Given the wide use of this crate, it seems very unlikely that an MSRV bump would be accepted. |
@dtolnay what's your take on the PR, especially regarding the MSRV question?
|
What if one is just able to somehow pass |
* upstream/master: Upload CI Cargo.lock for reproducing failures Work around new dead code warning in test Release 1.0.63 Update documentation of #[from] and #[backtrace] attributes Release 1.0.62 Support .0.0 nested tuple index Add regression test for issue 309 No need for dead code if struct fields are public Ignore warning on unused struct in test Fill in ignore reasons in all #[ignore] attributes
My personal belief is |
@dtolnay any guidance on how you'd like to see it done? |
PR LGTM with edge case that I don't believe you can import thiserror with a distinct package name with this path (I'm unsure if you could already). |
@jordens - What do we think about using We could do this by introducing a |
* upstream/master: Release 1.0.64 Mark #[automatically_derived] for generated impls
I'd like to hear about the prospects of this PR first. |
# Rationale for this change In order to make this rep `no_std` compatible, we need `no_std` compatible errors. `thiserror` is not `no_std` compatible, while `snafu` is. We are currently using `thiserror`. Note: While dtolnay/thiserror#304 is an open PR, it is not clear how soon this will get merged. Additionally, Substrate uses `snafu`, which would help unify dependencies for Substrate-based integrations. # What changes are included in this PR? NOTE: the individual commits may be good to review individually. - All error enum variants consisting of tuple structs are transformed into named structs. This is necessary because `snafu` does not support tuple structs. - Every `#[derive(Error)]` is substituted with the analogous `#[derive(Snafu)]`. In particular: * `#[error(...)]` attributes are substituted with equivalent `#[snafu(display(...))]` attributes * `#[error(transparent)]` attributes are substituted with equivalent `#[snafu(transparent)]` attributes (which also derive the corresponding `From` implementation) * For `ConversionError::TimestampConversionError`, the `#[snafu(context(false), display(...))]` attribute is used for deriving a `From` implementation, and at the same time maintain the custom error message - A `std` feature is introduced for the `proof-of-sql` crate, which in turns activates the `snafu/std` feature. The `std` feature is required for the `posql_db` example, because `Clap` relies on the `std::error::Error` trait. - `thiserror` still appears in the dependency tree (`cargo tree -i thiserror`), but only as a transitive dependency (via `blitzar`, and dev-dependencies) # Are these changes tested? Yes. This PR is a refactoring, and all existing tests pass.
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.
I'd really like this to land; the implementation looks good and even manages to avoid bumping MSRV as long as you include the std
feature. Getting this merged would unblock some no_std
support for Bevy that I'd love to get moving before the end of the year if possible.
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.
This is a good change which addresses all concerns and merging this would enable other crates to continue using thiserror. It's unfortunate that the ecosystem is splitting over this problem which is already solved.
I certainly support this PR. That said, and please correct me if I’m wrong, but it is my understanding that if we release this current PR, we immediately break the builds of anyone compiling with rustc < 1.81 which imports thiserror with default-features = false. Given the widespread usage of thiserror, I would imagine such a breakage is not tenable. I have suggested a simple tweak to this PR which I believe avoids this issue in this comment by effectively always enabling an equivalent-to-std feature before the Error trait is available in core. I assume given dtolnay was the author of the equivalent PR I linked to in anyhow, they would favour such a solution, and given that I assume the merging of any such PR is blocked on dtolnay’s approval, it seems likely we require such a change; tested with this particular import case. But maybe I’m missing something which means thiserror should be given different treatment? |
There are a few places where |
I'm not suggesting we remove the The current PR I believe will break compilation for anyone who is building on Instead, I suggest similar in execution to this PR on anyhow we:
After this change, I believe the breaks are minimized to people who:
Which I imagine is a sufficiently small crowd that this might be deemed acceptable, given the fix is to just add the For what it's worth, I think this is particularly a problem because |
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.
Just a few thoughts/suggestions from a bystander.
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ fn fallback(input: &DeriveInput, error: syn::Error) -> TokenStream { | |||
|
|||
#[allow(unused_qualifications)] | |||
#[automatically_derived] | |||
impl #impl_generics std::error::Error for #ty #ty_generics #where_clause | |||
impl #impl_generics ::thiserror::__private::error::Error for #ty #ty_generics #where_clause |
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.
Out of interest, why did we choose this rather than hardcoding ::std
or ::core
, in the compiled output (via e.g. an #error_crate
variable)?
My slight concern is that use of ::thiserror::__private
may leak this __private
namespace out and could confuse people debugging this. But using ::std
/ ::core
directly it's more obvious what's failing.
@@ -307,12 +309,12 @@ fn impl_enum(input: Enum) -> TokenStream { | |||
let self_provide = if type_is_option(backtrace_field.ty) { | |||
quote! { | |||
if let ::core::option::Option::Some(backtrace) = backtrace { | |||
#request.provide_ref::<std::backtrace::Backtrace>(backtrace); | |||
#request.provide_ref::<::std::backtrace::Backtrace>(backtrace); |
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.
MINOR: It may be nice if we gave a better compiler error if a user tried to specify a backtrace when we're not in std
mode, which could advise the user to enable the std
feature to use this? I believe the right place for this would be in valid.rs
.
... that said, it might actually cause more breakage if people are using default-features = false
mode and after upgrading they get a compilation error from this "help" because they are actually running in std
mode, just importing this crate incorrectly. So I think I've talked myself out of this.
So maybe safer to leave this as-is, and perhaps document that this only works if compiling with std
available?
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ license = "MIT OR Apache-2.0" | |||
repository = "https://github.com/dtolnay/thiserror" | |||
rust-version = "1.56" | |||
|
|||
# without the `std` feature (i.e. `no_std`): rust-version = "1.81" |
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.
As mentioned in this comment, I feel we should attempt to widen our build compatibility to not break rustc < 1.81
builds importing thiserror
with default-features = false
.
Actually, I'm a little wrong, apologies. I think I misinterpreted the PR on anyhow. The PR on anyhow simply avoids outputting a core error at all if So, when upgrading to fn main() -> Result<()> {
let config = std::fs::read_to_string("cluster.json")?;
Ok(())
} Compilation Error
That said, unlike anyhow, this crate (and indeed the output from the macro) simply wouldn't compile on 1.80 with But I accept others may disagree, and I don't think it's a blocker. Maybe I'm strange to default to using |
To be clear, |
I think all of this can be argued bikeshedding and is best left to a further PR. Someone can even now prepare a PR, descending from these commits, ready to be merged after this PR is merged if it's acceptably done and desirable. It doesn't have to be a blocker here. |
As another reference point, rust-url - with a similar amount of users on crates.io - just accepted a PR that adds a std feature. Just as in this PR, MSRV for std stayed the same, no_std requires 1.81. TL;DR: Would be great to get this PR merged as well :) |
Any updates here? This PR looks good to go, other popular crates have adopted this same pattern. @dtolnay, any notes on what's blocking this on your end? |
Is there any work left to do here? I would love to help. |
I'd love to use this crate in a project of mine, and it seems there hasn't been much activity in describing what needs to be done / changed. @dtolnay Any input on how this can proceed to being merged? |
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.
I had a chance to work on this feature this week, and I ended up going with a different implementation that automatically enables a std dependency in compilers older than 1.81, more like my corresponding change in anyhow
from earlier which has been linked above, and along the lines of what was suggested by @dhedey in #304 (comment) and #304 (comment). There were also some future compatibility drawbacks of this PR that I handled differently, which you can find in #373 and #372.
Thanks anyway for the work on this PR, and also to @dhedey for numerous substantive comments.
error_in_core
has been stabilized in 1.81. This PR builds on the work of #64/#211/#244.std
feature (default enabled) to gate thestd
components (currently onlystd::path
)std::error
orcore::error
to avoid bumping MSRV forstd
.no_std
does require1.81
.It's unclear to me whether it's better to bump the MSRV (
1.56
->1.81
) or use a private re-export of eitherstd::error
orcore::error
(as done here) to keep support forrustc < 1.81
.