# Objective
Currently the `compile_fail_utils` crate fails to compile (ironic) when
the `RUSTUP_HOME` env var isn't set. This has been the case for a long
time, but I only noticed it recently due to rust-analyzer starting to
show the error.
## Solution
Only filter the logs for the `RUSTUP_HOME` variable if it's set.
# Objective
- Fixes#18223.
## Solution
- Updated ui_test requirement from 0.23.0 to 0.29.1.
- Updated code to use the new APIs.
## Testing
- Ran CI locally.
---------
Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Co-authored-by: dependabot[bot] <49699333+dependabot[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
# Objective
Correct spelling
## Solution
Fix typos, specifically ones that I found in folders other than /crates
## Testing
CI
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
# Objective
- Fixes#17960
## Solution
- Followed the [edition upgrade
guide](https://doc.rust-lang.org/edition-guide/editions/transitioning-an-existing-project-to-a-new-edition.html)
## Testing
- CI
---
## Summary of Changes
### Documentation Indentation
When using lists in documentation, proper indentation is now linted for.
This means subsequent lines within the same list item must start at the
same indentation level as the item.
```rust
/* Valid */
/// - Item 1
/// Run-on sentence.
/// - Item 2
struct Foo;
/* Invalid */
/// - Item 1
/// Run-on sentence.
/// - Item 2
struct Foo;
```
### Implicit `!` to `()` Conversion
`!` (the never return type, returned by `panic!`, etc.) no longer
implicitly converts to `()`. This is particularly painful for systems
with `todo!` or `panic!` statements, as they will no longer be functions
returning `()` (or `Result<()>`), making them invalid systems for
functions like `add_systems`. The ideal fix would be to accept functions
returning `!` (or rather, _not_ returning), but this is blocked on the
[stabilisation of the `!` type
itself](https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/primitive.never.html), which is
not done.
The "simple" fix would be to add an explicit `-> ()` to system
signatures (e.g., `|| { todo!() }` becomes `|| -> () { todo!() }`).
However, this is _also_ banned, as there is an existing lint which (IMO,
incorrectly) marks this as an unnecessary annotation.
So, the "fix" (read: workaround) is to put these kinds of `|| -> ! { ...
}` closuers into variables and give the variable an explicit type (e.g.,
`fn()`).
```rust
// Valid
let system: fn() = || todo!("Not implemented yet!");
app.add_systems(..., system);
// Invalid
app.add_systems(..., || todo!("Not implemented yet!"));
```
### Temporary Variable Lifetimes
The order in which temporary variables are dropped has changed. The
simple fix here is _usually_ to just assign temporaries to a named
variable before use.
### `gen` is a keyword
We can no longer use the name `gen` as it is reserved for a future
generator syntax. This involved replacing uses of the name `gen` with
`r#gen` (the raw-identifier syntax).
### Formatting has changed
Use statements have had the order of imports changed, causing a
substantial +/-3,000 diff when applied. For now, I have opted-out of
this change by amending `rustfmt.toml`
```toml
style_edition = "2021"
```
This preserves the original formatting for now, reducing the size of
this PR. It would be a simple followup to update this to 2024 and run
`cargo fmt`.
### New `use<>` Opt-Out Syntax
Lifetimes are now implicitly included in RPIT types. There was a handful
of instances where it needed to be added to satisfy the borrow checker,
but there may be more cases where it _should_ be added to avoid
breakages in user code.
### `MyUnitStruct { .. }` is an invalid pattern
Previously, you could match against unit structs (and unit enum
variants) with a `{ .. }` destructuring. This is no longer valid.
### Pretty much every use of `ref` and `mut` are gone
Pattern binding has changed to the point where these terms are largely
unused now. They still serve a purpose, but it is far more niche now.
### `iter::repeat(...).take(...)` is bad
New lint recommends using the more explicit `iter::repeat_n(..., ...)`
instead.
## Migration Guide
The lifetimes of functions using return-position impl-trait (RPIT) are
likely _more_ conservative than they had been previously. If you
encounter lifetime issues with such a function, please create an issue
to investigate the addition of `+ use<...>`.
## Notes
- Check the individual commits for a clearer breakdown for what
_actually_ changed.
---------
Co-authored-by: François Mockers <francois.mockers@vleue.com>
# Objective
Fixes#16104
## Solution
I removed all instances of `:?` and put them back one by one where it
caused an error.
I removed some bevy_utils helper functions that were only used in 2
places and don't add value. See: #11478
## Testing
CI should catch the mistakes
## Migration Guide
`bevy::utils::{dbg,info,warn,error}` were removed. Use
`bevy::utils::tracing::{debug,info,warn,error}` instead.
---------
Co-authored-by: SpecificProtagonist <vincentjunge@posteo.net>
# Objective
- Our benchmarks and `compile_fail` tests lag behind the rest of the
engine because they are not in the Cargo workspace, so not checked by
CI.
- Fixes#16801, please see it for further context!
## Solution
- Add benchmarks and `compile_fail` tests to the Cargo workspace.
- Fix any leftover formatting issues and documentation.
## Testing
- I think CI should catch most things!
## Questions
<details>
<summary>Outdated issue I was having with function reflection being
optional</summary>
The `reflection_types` example is failing in Rust-Analyzer for me, but
not a normal check.
```rust
error[E0004]: non-exhaustive patterns: `ReflectRef::Function(_)` not covered
--> examples/reflection/reflection_types.rs:81:11
|
81 | match value.reflect_ref() {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ pattern `ReflectRef::Function(_)` not covered
|
note: `ReflectRef<'_>` defined here
--> /Users/bdeep/dev/bevy/bevy/crates/bevy_reflect/src/kind.rs:178:1
|
178 | pub enum ReflectRef<'a> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
...
188 | Function(&'a dyn Function),
| -------- not covered
= note: the matched value is of type `ReflectRef<'_>`
help: ensure that all possible cases are being handled by adding a match arm with a wildcard pattern or an explicit pattern as shown
|
126 ~ ReflectRef::Opaque(_) => {},
127 + ReflectRef::Function(_) => todo!()
|
```
I think it is because the following line is feature-gated:
cc0f6a8db4/examples/reflection/reflection_types.rs (L117-L122)
My theory for why this is happening is because the benchmarks enabled
`bevy_reflect`'s `function` feature, which gets merged with the rest of
the features when RA checks the workspace, but the `#[cfg(...)]` gate in
the example isn't detecting it:
cc0f6a8db4/benches/Cargo.toml (L19)
Any thoughts on how to fix this? It's not blocking, since the example
still compiles as normal, but it's just RA and the command `cargo check
--workspace --all-targets` appears to fail.
</summary>
# Objective
- Fixes#16802, part of #16801, extracted from #16770.
## Solution
- Fix `compile_fail_utils`'s example test so that it now compiles.
- Bless the results, which were outdated.
## Testing
- `cd tools/compile_fail_utils && cargo check --all-targets`
- `cd tools/compile_fail_utils && cargo test --test example`
# Objective
It looks like running `compile_fail_utils::test` on an invalid path just
skips the test. I'm not sure why `ui_test` doesn't fail the test, but it
seems pretty easy to accidentally cause a test to be skipped (I
experienced
[this](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/pull/14813#discussion_r1721880973)
while doing some refactoring on `bevy_reflect`).
## Solution
Check to make sure the given path exists before continuing on with the
tests.
Alternatively, we could look into seeing why this doesn't work properly
upstream. But I figured this solution was simple enough just to
implement directly without having to worry about updating `ui_test`.
## Testing
To verify that this works as expected `cd` into
`crates/bevy_reflect/compile_fail`. Then run the following:
```
cargo test --target-dir ../../../target
```
All compile fail tests should pass. Now edit the path used in
`crates/bevy_reflect/compile_fail/tests/derive.rs`. For example:
```diff
fn main() -> compile_fail_utils::ui_test::Result<()> {
- compile_fail_utils::test("reflect_derive", "tests/reflect_derive")
+ compile_fail_utils::test("reflect_derive", "tests/does_not_exist")
}
```
Run the tests again:
```
cargo test --target-dir ../../../target
```
Verify the test fails with an error like:
```
Error: path does not exist: "tests/does_not_exist"
```
# Objective
The github action summary titles every compile test group as
`compile_fail_utils`.
## Solution
Manually specify group names for compile fail tests.
## Testing
- Wait for compile fail tests to run.
- Observe the generated summary.
# Objective
- Follow-up of #13184 :)
- We use `ui_test` to test compiler errors for our custom macros.
- There are four crates related to compile fail tests
- `bevy_ecs_compile_fail_tests`, `bevy_macros_compile_fail_tests`, and
`bevy_reflect_compile_fail_tests`, which actually test the macros.
-
[`bevy_compile_test_utils`](64c1c65783/crates/bevy_compile_test_utils),
which provides helpers and common patterns for these tests.
- All of these crates reside within the `crates` directory.
- This can be confusing, especially for newcomers. All of the other
folders in `crates` are actual published libraries, except for these 4.
## Solution
- Move all compile fail tests to a `compile_fail` folder under their
corresponding crate.
- E.g. `crates/bevy_ecs_compile_fail_tests` would be moved to
`crates/bevy_ecs/compile_fail`.
- Move `bevy_compile_test_utils` to `tools/compile_fail_utils`.
There are a few benefits to this approach:
1. An internal testing detail is less intrusive (and confusing) for
those who just want to browse the public Bevy interface.
2. Follows a pre-existing approach of organizing related crates inside a
larger crate's folder.
- See `bevy_gizmos/macros` for an example.
4. Makes consistent the terms `compile_test`, `compile_fail`, and
`compile_fail_test` in code. It's all just `compile_fail` now, because
we are specifically testing the error messages on compiler failures.
- To be clear it can still be referred to by these terms in comments and
speech, just the names of the crates and the CI command are now
consistent.
## Testing
Run the compile fail CI command:
```shell
cargo run -p ci -- compile-fail
```
If it still passes, then my refactor was successful.
