-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
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
build: ensure msrv 1.80.1 and upgrade dependencies #20
Conversation
Signed-off-by: tison <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: tison <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: tison <[email protected]>
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!
|
||
Detailed results are available in [etc/benchmark-result](etc/benchmark-result). | ||
|
||
## Supported Rust Versions (MSRV 1.71) | ||
|
||
Fastrace is built against the latest stable release. The minimum supported version is 1.80.1. The current Fastrace version is not guaranteed to build on Rust versions earlier than the minimum supported version. |
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.
I feel like it's too aggressive to have an MSRV like this. But we can see if it works well and evaluate it as needed.
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.
The background is that, we don't actually define an MSRV before and it's effectively latest stable. Thus, use the current stable version is the least surprising one.
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.
Also reducing MSRV should not be a breaking change IIUC.
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.
I'm fine with this policy.
Seems the same problem as #9 but on linux. |
@andylokandy Then perhaps merge this one and debugging the macro issue later? |
Yes, was just waiting for ci to rerun |
This refers to #8