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

librustdoc: Use pulldown-cmark-escape for HTML escaping #137285

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 24, 2025

Conversation

yotamofek
Copy link
Contributor

Implementation of @notriddle 's suggestion.
Somewhat related to #137274 , but the two PRs should be complementary.

Local perf results look like a nice improvement! (so would love a perf run on the CI)

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Feb 19, 2025

r? @GuillaumeGomez

rustbot has assigned @GuillaumeGomez.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output. labels Feb 19, 2025
@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Feb 19, 2025

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

@yotamofek
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sorry @GuillaumeGomez, meant to r? @notriddle , but I'll take an approval from either of you 🤣

@rustbot rustbot assigned notriddle and unassigned GuillaumeGomez Feb 19, 2025
@Kobzol
Copy link
Contributor

Kobzol commented Feb 19, 2025

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Feb 19, 2025
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2025
…ng, r=<try>

librustdoc: Use `pulldown-cmark-escape` for HTML escaping

Implementation of `@notriddle` 's [suggestion](rust-lang#137274 (comment)).
Somewhat related to rust-lang#137274 , but the two PRs should be complementary.

Local perf results look like a nice improvement! (so would love a perf run on the CI)
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 19, 2025

⌛ Trying commit 489f5c1 with merge 658976a...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 19, 2025

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 658976a (658976aac4366a35913589b24fe0f9e539443b62)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (658976a): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

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

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.3% [-0.6%, -0.2%] 12
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.4% [-0.6%, -0.2%] 3
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.3% [-0.6%, -0.2%] 12

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (primary -0.4%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.0% [2.0%, 2.0%] 1
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.8% [-2.8%, -2.8%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.4% [-2.8%, 2.0%] 2

Cycles

Results (primary -4.0%)

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-4.0% [-5.7%, -1.7%] 6
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
- - 0
All ❌✅ (primary) -4.0% [-5.7%, -1.7%] 6

Binary size

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

Bootstrap: 773.063s -> 772.977s (-0.01%)
Artifact size: 362.34 MiB -> 362.33 MiB (-0.00%)

@rustbot rustbot removed the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Feb 19, 2025
@GuillaumeGomez
Copy link
Member

Nice, thanks!

@bors r+ rollup=never

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 19, 2025

📌 Commit 489f5c1 has been approved by GuillaumeGomez

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@bors 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 Feb 19, 2025
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 24, 2025

⌛ Testing commit 489f5c1 with merge f43e549...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Feb 24, 2025

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: GuillaumeGomez
Pushing f43e549 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Feb 24, 2025
@bors bors merged commit f43e549 into rust-lang:master Feb 24, 2025
7 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.87.0 milestone Feb 24, 2025
@yotamofek yotamofek deleted the pr/rustdoc/pulldown-escaping branch February 24, 2025 10:29
@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (f43e549): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

This is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
- - 0
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
- - 0
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.3% [-0.6%, -0.2%] 14
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.5% [-1.5%, -0.1%] 5
All ❌✅ (primary) -0.3% [-0.6%, -0.2%] 14

Max RSS (memory usage)

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

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: 770.178s -> 770.825s (0.08%)
Artifact size: 359.64 MiB -> 359.65 MiB (0.00%)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-rustdoc Relevant to the rustdoc team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-rustdoc-frontend Relevant to the rustdoc-frontend team, which will review and decide on the web UI/UX output.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants