Skip to content
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

Changelog edit and fuzz for #139 #143

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 15, 2025

Conversation

finnbear
Copy link
Collaborator

@finnbear finnbear commented Jan 14, 2025

Followup to #139

  • Changelog
  • Fuzz (make sure ordering of new algorithm is correct)

Noticed #140 (infinity this time, not NaN), which needs a new fix, but that's orthogonal (only affects near-miss rays, so I simply restrict the new assertions to Mode::Grid)

I intend to wait ~24h before merging, just in case there are any comments/suggestions/objections.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jan 14, 2025

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 30 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 48.72%. Comparing base (9e6b312) to head (3a0dd2b).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
fuzz/fuzz_targets/fuzz.rs 0.00% 30 Missing ⚠️

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #143      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   49.81%   48.72%   -1.09%     
==========================================
  Files          17       17              
  Lines        1347     1377      +30     
==========================================
  Hits          671      671              
- Misses        676      706      +30     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
fuzz/fuzz_targets/fuzz.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
fuzz/fuzz_targets/fuzz.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@finnbear finnbear force-pushed the changelog_fuzz_139 branch 8 times, most recently from b8bc24d to 8a89a0c Compare January 15, 2025 01:55
Comment on lines -57 to +58
toolchain: nightly
# use a known good version (e.g. on Jan 14 2025, a faulty `rustc` nightly panicked)
toolchain: nightly-2024-01-13

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Copy link
Owner

@svenstaro svenstaro Jan 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure. I think it's good for the ecosystem to always run the latest nightly. We will otherwise definitely forget to upgrade. Hard regressions usually get fixed quickly.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it's good for the ecosystem to always run the latest nightly.

Yes, it is possible to sacrifice reliability on our end to increase the chance that we find (and report?) issues to upstream rustc for the benefit of the ecosystem.

Never upgrading is also a bad policy, as eventual developments in locally-installed nightly Rust will produce code that doesn't work on the CI's version.

I personally view the harms of rustc-roulette to be greater, as it creates collateral damage to unrelated PR's. Never upgrading only risks errors when updating the fuzzer itself.

A real solution might involve trying the latest and producing a warning while falling back to a known good version if it doesn't work, but it seems complex to implement in CI.

I'll merge, but I'll make a tracking issue to help avoid forgetting about this.

Copy link
Owner

@svenstaro svenstaro left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Works for me!

@finnbear finnbear merged commit ca41785 into svenstaro:master Jan 15, 2025
11 of 12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants