-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 985
Expand RUSTUP_TOOLCHAIN_SOURCE
's documentation
#4549
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
Conversation
Should we add a caveat like "except insofar as to mirror an earlier invocation from rustup"? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM modulo #4549 (comment).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
I've made the change since that seems to be the consensus. But, personally, I think it's a bad idea to include the caveat. First, there is no demonstrated need. The situation described in #4518 (comment) is hypothetical. I think it is safer to not include caveats until there is a demonstrated need for them. And second, it's not clear to me how it would work. Currently, the proxy sets |
3232562
to
03102e2
Compare
@smoelius Indeed, if recursive calls are in place then this caveat currently serves no purpose; however IIRC what you described (bypassing rustup's toolchain resolution) was exactly the scenario @weihanglo has pointed out. This gets me thinking if recursive calls have a role to play in this story and, if they do, which one. I personally think it has to do with what cargo wants from this feature (cc @weihanglo). |
Please merge if you are happy with the changes. |
That kind of use cases I believe are mostly and more likely in enterprise environments, rather than in a public space. And I assure it is not hypothetical. The only use case right now is rust-lang/cargo#16131, which would incur an imprecise warning in
It depends on what kind of recursive call, I guess? If they call something like |
Not exactly, The rust-analyzer case is like
rust-analyzer itself doesn't really call proxies directly IIUC. Granted, the way rust-analyzer dealing with toolchain proxies has changed a couple of times and I might already have the outdated understanding. |
As suggested by @weihanglo in #4518 (comment).