Cleanup in the attribute parsers #149789

JonathanBrouwer · 2025-12-08T21:59:11Z

Removes a bunch of unused lifetimes in the attribute parsers
Creates two variants of PathParser, because we statically know which variant we're in

r? @jdonszelmann

rustbot · 2025-12-08T21:59:15Z

Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_attr_parsing

cc @jdonszelmann

JonathanBrouwer · 2025-12-08T21:59:26Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue
Maybe the changes to the PathParser gain some perf?

Cleanup in the attribute parsers

jdonszelmann · 2025-12-08T22:41:45Z

Doubt it but we can try

jdonszelmann · 2025-12-08T22:45:12Z

@bors r+ rollup

was debating whether to cancel the perf run. I guess we can either rollup never and get the perf run later or keep the run going. If we keep the current one going then this pr can be part of the next roll-up and will use fewer ci resources and land quicker so I'm letting the perf run here continue and am explicitly rolling the pr up.

bors · 2025-12-08T22:45:15Z

📌 Commit 5c661ae has been approved by jdonszelmann

It is now in the queue for this repository.

rust-bors · 2025-12-09T00:14:38Z

☀️ Try build successful (CI)
Build commit: c626dd2 (c626dd2960debb0071cacde4d04165c310c5301c, parent: 5bc345055b06dc096b01bc6d1e0cbe92d3cc630e)

rust-timer · 2025-12-09T00:55:37Z

Finished benchmarking commit (c626dd2): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request means it may be perf-sensitive – we'll automatically label it not fit for rolling up. You can override this, but we strongly advise not to, due to possible changes in compiler perf.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.1%	[0.1%, 0.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.0%	[0.0%, 0.0%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.2%	[-0.2%, -0.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-0.0%	[-0.2%, 0.1%]	2

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -1.4%, secondary 0.2%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	3.2%	[3.2%, 3.2%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-1.4%, -1.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-1.2%	[-1.8%, -0.7%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-1.4%, -1.4%]	1

Cycles

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Binary size

This benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 473.701s -> 470.928s (-0.59%)
Artifact size: 389.02 MiB -> 389.00 MiB (-0.01%)

jdonszelmann · 2025-12-09T08:09:37Z

Nothing it seems

JonathanBrouwer · 2025-12-09T08:29:52Z

Agreed this is probably just noise, I don't think this needs to be rollup=never
@bors rollup=always

Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - #144938 (Enable `outline-atomics` by default on more AArch64 platforms) - #146579 (Handle macro invocation in attribute during parse) - #149400 (unstable proc_macro tracked::* rename/restructure) - #149664 (attempt to fix unreachable code regression ) - #149806 (Mirror `ubuntu:24.04` on ghcr) Failed merges: - #149789 (Cleanup in the attribute parsers) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

bors · 2025-12-10T02:46:43Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #149818) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

Rollup of 5 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang/rust#144938 (Enable `outline-atomics` by default on more AArch64 platforms) - rust-lang/rust#146579 (Handle macro invocation in attribute during parse) - rust-lang/rust#149400 (unstable proc_macro tracked::* rename/restructure) - rust-lang/rust#149664 (attempt to fix unreachable code regression ) - rust-lang/rust#149806 (Mirror `ubuntu:24.04` on ghcr) Failed merges: - rust-lang/rust#149789 (Cleanup in the attribute parsers) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

rustbot · 2025-12-12T08:03:17Z

This PR was rebased onto a different main commit. Here's a range-diff highlighting what actually changed.

Rebasing is a normal part of keeping PRs up to date, so no action is needed—this note is just to help reviewers.

JonathanBrouwer · 2025-12-12T08:03:29Z

@bors r=jdonszelmann

bors · 2025-12-12T08:03:32Z

📌 Commit aa6db80 has been approved by jdonszelmann

It is now in the queue for this repository.

…ram, r=jdonszelmann Cleanup in the attribute parsers * Removes a bunch of unused lifetimes in the attribute parsers * Creates two variants of `PathParser`, because we statically know which variant we're in r? `@jdonszelmann`

…ram, r=jdonszelmann Cleanup in the attribute parsers * Removes a bunch of unused lifetimes in the attribute parsers * Creates two variants of `PathParser`, because we statically know which variant we're in r? ``@jdonszelmann``

…ram, r=jdonszelmann Cleanup in the attribute parsers * Removes a bunch of unused lifetimes in the attribute parsers * Creates two variants of `PathParser`, because we statically know which variant we're in r? ```@jdonszelmann```

…ram, r=jdonszelmann Cleanup in the attribute parsers * Removes a bunch of unused lifetimes in the attribute parsers * Creates two variants of `PathParser`, because we statically know which variant we're in r? ````@jdonszelmann````

…ram, r=jdonszelmann Cleanup in the attribute parsers * Removes a bunch of unused lifetimes in the attribute parsers * Creates two variants of `PathParser`, because we statically know which variant we're in r? `````@jdonszelmann`````

…ram, r=jdonszelmann Cleanup in the attribute parsers * Removes a bunch of unused lifetimes in the attribute parsers * Creates two variants of `PathParser`, because we statically know which variant we're in r? ``````@jdonszelmann``````

Rollup of 7 pull requests Successful merges: - #149655 (bootstrap: add rustc-dev install target) - #149789 (Cleanup in the attribute parsers) - #149791 (Remove uses of `cfg({any()/all()})`) - #149792 (Suggest `cfg(false)` instead of `cfg(FALSE)`) - #149883 (add regression test for `proc_macro` error subdiagnostics) - #149884 (Clippy subtree update) - #149896 (Add myself(makai410) to the review rotation) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup

Rollup merge of #149789 - JonathanBrouwer:remove-lifetime-param, r=jdonszelmann Cleanup in the attribute parsers * Removes a bunch of unused lifetimes in the attribute parsers * Creates two variants of `PathParser`, because we statically know which variant we're in r? ```````@jdonszelmann```````

rustbot added A-attributes Area: Attributes (`#[…]`, `#![…]`) S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Dec 8, 2025

rustbot assigned jdonszelmann Dec 8, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2025

Auto merge of #149789 - JonathanBrouwer:remove-lifetime-param, r=<try>

c626dd2

Cleanup in the attribute parsers

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Dec 8, 2025

bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Dec 8, 2025

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Dec 9, 2025

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2025

Rollup of 5 pull requests #149818

Merged

bors added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Dec 10, 2025

JonathanBrouwer added 2 commits December 12, 2025 08:58

Remove from MetaItemParser::from_attr

97252d3

Remove lifetime param from parser types

86a97c4

Remove lifetime param from parser functions

aa6db80

JonathanBrouwer force-pushed the remove-lifetime-param branch from 5c661ae to aa6db80 Compare December 12, 2025 08:03

bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Dec 12, 2025

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2025

Rollup of 8 pull requests #149905

Closed

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2025

Rollup of 7 pull requests #149906

Closed

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2025

Rollup of 7 pull requests #149908

Closed

matthiaskrgr mentioned this pull request Dec 12, 2025

Rollup of 7 pull requests #149909

Merged

bors merged commit c511c60 into rust-lang:main Dec 12, 2025
11 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.94.0 milestone Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

Cleanup in the attribute parsers #149789

Cleanup in the attribute parsers #149789

Conversation

JonathanBrouwer commented Dec 8, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Dec 8, 2025

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Dec 8, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

jdonszelmann commented Dec 8, 2025

Uh oh!

jdonszelmann commented Dec 8, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 8, 2025

Uh oh!

rust-bors bot commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Dec 9, 2025

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - no action needed

Instruction count

Max RSS (memory usage)

Cycles

Binary size

Uh oh!

jdonszelmann commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

bors commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants