Description
I am not sure whether compiler/compiler_for is a meaningful + worthwhile distinction; I think the best way to find out is probably to try to unify and see what goes wrong. I suspect the intent behind the addition was largely the typical "it seems like this one place wants something slightly different" that perhaps was more of a patchwork fix than done with long-term correctness, so it's unlikely to be super principled I expect in terms of where it's used and such.
I tried changing this and it went ... not well. Removing compiler altogether gives 71 build errors, and changing it to alias compiler_for(stage, host, host) fails a bunch of the tests, including some that look like real issues:
---- builder::tests::dist::dist_with_targets_and_hosts stdout ----
thread 'builder::tests::dist::dist_with_targets_and_hosts' panicked at 'assertion failed: `(left == right)`
Diff < left / right > :
[
Rustc {
compiler: Compiler {
< stage: 1,
> stage: 2,
host: A,
> },
> },
> Rustc {
> compiler: Compiler {
> stage: 2,
> host: B,
},
},
]
', src/bootstrap/builder/tests.rs:314:9
Looking at the call sites, they usually look like this:
fn make_run(run: RunConfig<'_>) {
run.builder.ensure($name {
compiler: run.builder.compiler(run.builder.top_stage, run.builder.config.build),
target: run.target,
extra_features: Vec::new(),
});
}so I think the "proper" fix is to pass run.target into compiler_for in most of these cases; at very least, we can't assume it's always host.
In some cases it may not be clear what target is appropriate - feel free to ask on Zulip.
@rustbot label +A-rustbuild +E-mentor +E-medium
Originally posted by @jyn514 in #96000 (comment)