feat: macro recompile trigger #1061
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
segfault-magnet
requested review from
digorithm,
iqdecay,
hal3e,
MujkicA,
Salka1988 and
Br1ght0ne
as code owners
segfault-magnet
changed the title
Br1ght0ne
previously approved these changes
Jul 25, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Awesome engineering, LGTM! Maybe we should open a related issue for removing this later. Doesn't seem like rust-lang/rust#99515 will land any time soon, though. :)
Made an issue here |
hal3e
previously approved these changes
Jul 26, 2023
hal3e
approved these changes
Jul 26, 2023
Br1ght0ne
approved these changes
Jul 26, 2023
digorithm
approved these changes
Jul 26, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
closes: #1060
The solution (until Rust has an official way of doing it) is to call
include_bytesinside your macro. This is detected by the compiler and it will watch the path for changes.I've assigned it to a
const _: &[u8] = include_bytes!(...)and it seems it gets optimized away.Couldn't find a trace of the JSON file in the resulting executable (even under debug build).
So we might have gotten away with a no-downsides hack.
Tested via a separate e2e suite. Didn't include it in the PR since it would require compiling the whole SDK twice during testing.
Checklist