| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Closes #950.
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
We can now get rid of the standalone `intersect_bounds` function.
Signed-off-by: Gabriela Moldovan <[email protected]>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
By implementing `RangeBounds` for `TimerangeBound`, we get
`RangeBoundsExt` for free. This will enable `parse_decrypt_validate` to
easily compute the intersection of the `TimerangeBound`s its layers.
Signed-off-by: Gabriela Moldovan <[email protected]>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This will be used for computing the final `TimerangeBound` of a `HsDesc`
from the `TimerangeBound`s of its inner and outer layers.
Signed-off-by: Gabriela Moldovan <[email protected]>
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This makes `descriptor_ensure` refetch the descriptor if it has been
cached for longer than `descriptor-lifetime` minutes.
Signed-off-by: Gabriela Moldovan <[email protected]>
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
The four values of times taken in a particular test were changed to both
be human readable and have comments explaining their significance (they
are all important moments after the Unix Epoch for freedom)
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
These functions consume a checkable wrapper, and return a new
checkable wrapper with mapped contents but the same not-yet-checked
constraints.
As documented, They are "dangerous" because the provided function
gets access to the contents before they are checked; the caller has
to make sure that the provided function doesn't expose their
contents inappropriately.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
This panics on error, and we're fine with a panic on misbehavior in
tests.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This warning kind of snuck up on us! (See #748) For now, let's
disable it. (I've cleaned it up in a couple of examples, since
those are meant to be more idiomatic and user-facing.)
Closes #748.
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Add test lint blocks to all "mod test"
See merge request tpo/core/arti!937
|
| | |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
This is precisely the result of running the rune in
maint/adhoc-add-lint-blocks.
|
| |/ |
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
I want one of these for the bridge descriptor downloader, and they
seem reasonable to me.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Apparently cargo fmt doesn't like these, which my perl rune didn't
delete.
This commit is precisely the result of `cargo fmt`.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The feature we want is `#[doc = include_str!("README.md")]`, which is
stable since 1.54 and our MSRV is now 1.56.
This commit is precisely the result of the following Perl rune:
perl -i~ -0777 -pe 's{(^//!(?!.*\@\@).*\n)+}{#![doc = include_str!("../README.md")]\n}m' crates/*/src/lib.rs
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
| |
Update all lint blocks
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
From running add_warning, with manual picking of the right
hunks/lines.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This was the result of:
maint/add_warning crates/*/src/{lib,main}.rs
and then manually curating the results.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| |\
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
Don't use SystemTime::now()
Closes #306
See merge request tpo/core/arti!365
|
| | | |
|
| |/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
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<Something> to Something: Clone, or vice
versa.
|
| |
|
|
| |
Closes #338.
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
This will cause some pain for now, but now is really the best time
to do this kind of thing.
|
