Issue 4079

[ahl]

fixes #4079

Without this fix:

Mismatch at tests/source/issue-4079.rs:3:
 /*!
  * Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. In lacinia
  * ullamcorper lorem, non hendrerit enim convallis ut. Curabitur id sem
- * volutpat
+  * volutpat
  */
 
 /*! Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. In lacinia

Mismatch at tests/source/issue-4079.rs:10:
- * ullamcorper lorem, non hendrerit enim convallis ut. Curabitur id sem
- * volutpat */
+  * ullamcorper lorem, non hendrerit enim convallis ut. Curabitur id sem
+  * volutpat */

[calebcartwright]

I have this nagging suspicion that the offset calc here was used to handle some edge case, though for the life of me I can't think of what that may be nor have I been able to come up with any kind of input that breaks because of this change 🤷‍♂️

As such I think this is probably a good fix, though I wouldn't be completely shocked to see an issue reported at some point in the future

[ahl]

Yes agreed that there's some risk here to extant code that lacks corresponding tests. I think this logic may have had to do with some confusion in the code about whether * or ** was the right line continuation on doc block comments.

I looked around for C-style comments in a bunch of rust code. I found very little, but didn't see issues with the code I did find.

[topecongiro]

LGTM, thank you!

[ahl]

That's great, thanks! Can I get someone to look at #4071 which is in a similar vein?

[davepacheco]

Thanks again, @topecongiro! Any idea when this will be released? I was surprised not to find it in the latest nightly I picked up (1.4.14) but I'm not sure how the release process works for rustfmt.

[calebcartwright]

but I'm not sure how the release process works for rustfmt

@davepacheco - at the moment we're primarily focused on getting rustfmt 2.0 released, so the master branch contains active development for the 2.0 release.

New 1.x versions of rustfmt (like 1.4.14) are only being released to address major bugs or issues with rustfmt being broken on nightly, and typically only contain the minimal set of changes needed to resolve the issue which is why this change wasn't in 1.4.14.

[ahl]

@calebcartwright we (@davepacheco and I) found this in our use of rustfmt and wanted to unblock ourselves by submitting the PR. We appreciate you folks accepting the PRs (this and #4071) and any acceleration into a released version would be greatly appreciated. Further, if there are ways we can help with 2.0 we'd be happy to.

[calebcartwright]

Understood @ahl, and thanks for the PRs and willingness to contribute!

It's up to @topecongiro's when a new release is cut, but I just wanted to provide some background on why this change wasn't in 1.4.14.

If we have to release another 1.x version we can include this change, I just don't know if/when there may be another 1.x version.

[davepacheco]

Thanks for the context. That's very helpful.

[ytmimi]

seems like the backport was completed by #4253