From e197b2ea8c6e16689138cacdaa0a87dc4cbc933f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: xFrednet <xFrednet@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:52:39 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Correct rust code block in *Dataflow Analysis*

---
 src/mir/dataflow.md | 22 ++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/mir/dataflow.md b/src/mir/dataflow.md
index 15bfd6aed..e6e4b9b1a 100644
--- a/src/mir/dataflow.md
+++ b/src/mir/dataflow.md
@@ -127,16 +127,18 @@ value will be `true`, since our analysis is done as soon as we determine that
 `transmute` has been called. Our join operator will just be the boolean OR (`||`)
 operator. We use OR and not AND because of this case:
 
-```
-let x = if some_cond {
-    std::mem::transmute<i32, u32>(0_i32); // transmute was called!
-} else {
-    1_u32; // transmute was not called
-};
-
-// Has transmute been called by this point? We conservatively approximate that
-// as yes, and that is why we use the OR operator.
-println!("x: {}", x);
+```rust
+# unsafe fn example(some_cond: bool) {
+    let x = if some_cond {
+        std::mem::transmute::<i32, u32>(0_i32) // transmute was called!
+    } else {
+        1_u32 // transmute was not called
+    };
+
+    // Has transmute been called by this point? We conservatively approximate that
+    // as yes, and that is why we use the OR operator.
+    println!("x: {}", x);
+# }
 ```
 
 ## Inspecting the Results of a Dataflow Analysis

From be890df1777226a35a9d79a457e75ecc47579aa4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: xFrednet <xFrednet@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 11:20:31 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Review comments <3

---
 src/SUMMARY.md      |  2 +-
 src/mir/dataflow.md | 20 ++++++++++----------
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/SUMMARY.md b/src/SUMMARY.md
index 6b70038a3..7950e4687 100644
--- a/src/SUMMARY.md
+++ b/src/SUMMARY.md
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@
 
 - [Prologue](./part-5-intro.md)
 - [MIR optimizations](./mir/optimizations.md)
-- [Debugging](./mir/debugging.md)
+- [Debugging MIR](./mir/debugging.md)
 - [Constant evaluation](./const-eval.md)
     - [Interpreter](./const-eval/interpret.md)
 - [Monomorphization](./backend/monomorph.md)
diff --git a/src/mir/dataflow.md b/src/mir/dataflow.md
index e6e4b9b1a..7bd0f0aab 100644
--- a/src/mir/dataflow.md
+++ b/src/mir/dataflow.md
@@ -129,15 +129,15 @@ operator. We use OR and not AND because of this case:
 
 ```rust
 # unsafe fn example(some_cond: bool) {
-    let x = if some_cond {
-        std::mem::transmute::<i32, u32>(0_i32) // transmute was called!
-    } else {
-        1_u32 // transmute was not called
-    };
-
-    // Has transmute been called by this point? We conservatively approximate that
-    // as yes, and that is why we use the OR operator.
-    println!("x: {}", x);
+let x = if some_cond {
+    std::mem::transmute::<i32, u32>(0_i32) // transmute was called!
+} else {
+    1_u32 // transmute was not called
+};
+
+// Has transmute been called by this point? We conservatively approximate that
+// as yes, and that is why we use the OR operator.
+println!("x: {}", x);
 # }
 ```
 
@@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ the example below:
 
 ["gen-kill" problems]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data-flow_analysis#Bit_vector_problems
 [*Static Program Analysis*]: https://cs.au.dk/~amoeller/spa/
-[Debugging MIR]: ./debugging.html
+[Debugging MIR]: ./debugging.md
 [`AnalysisDomain`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_mir_dataflow/trait.AnalysisDomain.html
 [`Analysis`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_mir_dataflow/trait.Analysis.html
 [`Engine`]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nightly-rustc/rustc_mir_dataflow/struct.Engine.html

From 2c3b120478536f0f69d3d191d1990a1e1ffdd109 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Noah Lev <camelidcamel@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 13:17:04 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Disable linkcheck in PRs until bugs are fixed

See https://github.com/Michael-F-Bryan/mdbook-linkcheck/issues/77
and https://github.com/Michael-F-Bryan/mdbook-linkcheck/issues/86.

These bugs are causing linkcheck to erroneously fail because we run it
using `-f`, to avoid too many requests. For now, disable linkcheck in PR
CI, though leave it enabled in the cron job, where the bug should not
occur.
---
 ci/linkcheck.sh | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/ci/linkcheck.sh b/ci/linkcheck.sh
index 14cd53ac9..5f523f874 100755
--- a/ci/linkcheck.sh
+++ b/ci/linkcheck.sh
@@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ if [ "$GITHUB_EVENT_NAME" = "schedule" ] ; then # running in scheduled job
 
   echo "Doing full link check."
 elif [ "$GITHUB_EVENT_NAME" = "pull_request" ] ; then # running in PR CI build
+  echo "*** WARNING: linkcheck temporarily disabled due to bugs ***"
+  exit 0
+
   if [ -z "$BASE_SHA" ]; then
     echo "error: unexpected state: BASE_SHA must be non-empty in CI"
     exit 1
@@ -25,6 +28,9 @@ elif [ "$GITHUB_EVENT_NAME" = "pull_request" ] ; then # running in PR CI build
 
   echo "Checking files changed since $BASE_SHA: $CHANGED_FILES"
 else # running locally
+  echo "*** WARNING: linkcheck temporarily disabled due to bugs ***"
+  exit 0
+
   COMMIT_RANGE=master...
   CHANGED_FILES=$(git diff --name-only $COMMIT_RANGE | sed 's#^src/##' | tr '\n' ' ')
   FLAGS="-f $CHANGED_FILES"