mirrors/arti.git/crates/tor-guardmgr, branch derive-traits

Merge branch 'clippy-allow-arc-clone' into 'main'

2022-03-01T20:38:05Z

Disable clippy::clone_on_ref_ptr See merge request tpo/core/arti!352

Bump all crates to 0.1.0

2022-03-01T13:59:34Z

Merge branch 'always-coarsetime' into 'main'

2022-02-28T13:39:10Z

Make coarsetime dependency and traffic-timestamping non-optional. See merge request tpo/core/arti!358

impl Debug for various internal types

2022-02-25T17:37:10Z

I wanted this while debugging something. The ad-hoc impl Debug with f.debug_struct is getting repetitive and I've already perpetrated one copy-paste mistake. We should consider using something like the `educe` crate's Clone.

Make coarsetime dependency and traffic-timestamping non-optional.

2022-02-25T15:31:01Z

Previously coarsetime and the traffic-timestamp feature were enabled, since they were only required for a small corner of the guardmgr algorithm. But in 1.0 and beyond we'll be adding a bunch of other features (eg, netflow padding, DoS prevention) that will need coarsetime all over the place. And since we're going to be doing coarsetime all over the place, the previous justification for making traffic-timestamping optional (the tiny performance hit) is no longer relevant.

Disable clippy::clone_on_ref_ptr

2022-02-24T18:15:44Z

This lint is IMO inherently ill-conceived. I have looked for the reasons why this might be thought to be a good idea and there were basically two (and they are sort of contradictory): I. "Calling ‘.clone()` on an Rc, Arc, or Weak can obscure the fact that only the pointer is being cloned, not the underlying data." This is the wording from https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/v0.0.212/#clone_on_ref_ptr It is a bit terse; we are left to infer why it is a bad idea to obscure this fact. It seems to me that if it is bad to obscure some fact, that must be because the fact is a hazard. But why would it be a hazard to not copy the underlying data ? In other languages, faliing to copy the underlying data is a serious correctness hazard. There is a whose class of bugs where things were not copied, and then mutated and/or reused in multiple places in ways that were not what the programmer intended. In my experience, this is a very common bug when writing Python and Javascript. I'm told it's common in golang too. But in Rust this bug is much much harder to write. The data inside an Arc is immutable. To have this bug you'd have use interior mutability - ie mess around with Mutex or RefCell. That provides a good barrier to these kind of accidents. II. "The reason for writing Rc::clone and Arc::clone [is] to make it clear that only the pointer is being cloned, as opposed to the underlying data. The former is always fast, while the latter can be very expensive depending on what is being cloned." This is the reasoning found here https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-clippy/issues/2048 This is saying that *not* using Arc::clone is hazardous. Specifically, that a deep clone is a performance hazard. But for this argument, the lint is precisely backwards. It's linting the "good" case and asking for it to be written in a more explicit way; while the supposedly bad case can be written conveniently. Also, many objects (in our codebase, and in all the libraries we use) that are Clone are in fact simply handles. They contain Arc(s) (or similar) and are cheap to clone. Indeed, that is the usual case. It does not make sense to distinguish in the syntax we use to clone such a handle, whether the handle is a transparent Arc, or an opaque struct containing one or more other handles. Forcing Arc::clone to be written as such makes for code churn when a type is changed from Arc to Something: Clone, or vice versa.

Remove clippy::needless_borrow exception in CI.

2022-02-20T14:09:38Z

This exception is no longer necessary now that the underlying CI bug is fixed.

Change deny(clippy::all) to warn(clippy::all).

2022-02-14T14:24:06Z

Closes #338.

Add TODOs on uncertain points about time_since_last_traffic

2022-02-09T15:06:53Z

This edge-case was there even before the migration of 595fe1ab881b94106649, but now it's more explicit and ought to be revisited.

Remove the use of Mutex in channel unused_since timestamp

2022-02-08T23:28:45Z