Add support for `annotate-snippets`'s `no-graphics` output format by Muscraft · Pull Request #165708 · rust-lang/rust

Muscraft · 2026-11-09T17:57:47Z

Tracking Issue: #165164
MCP: rust-lang/compiler-team#1045

This PR adds the initial support for annotate-snippets's no-graphics output format. The no-graphics output format doesn't show source snippets or use any graphical decorations and is primarily designed for Text-To-Speech and Braille displays. The goal at this time is to get no-graphics in front of users so we can iterate on and improve the output.

🤖 LLM involvement: I used an LLM to review the commits before submitting

r? @estebank

rustbot · 2026-11-09T17:57:54Z

These commits modify the Cargo.lock file. Unintentional changes to Cargo.lock can be introduced when switching branches and rebasing PRs.

If this was unintentional then you should revert the changes before this PR is merged.
Otherwise, you can ignore this comment.

rustbot · 2026-11-09T20:05:11Z

The parser was modified, potentially altering the grammar of (stable) Rust
which would be a breaking change.

cc @fmease

estebank

I'm leaning towards r+, but am slightly concerned by this new flag option being insta-stable. Could we add a check for -Zunstable-options being present before allowing the output? It could even still allow changing the rendering (even on stable), as long as an error is always emitted complaining that the feature is unstable. That way people can already start using it, while giving no stability guarantees because having the flag always enabled would cause it to never permit a compile to succeed.

View changes since this review

estebank · 2026-11-09T20:31:46Z

@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ use crate::{
 /// Describes the way the content of the `rendered` field of the json output is generated
 #[derive(Clone, Copy, Debug, PartialEq, Eq)]
 pub struct HumanReadableErrorType {


Non-blocker. We should be moving towards an enum, I think.

I agree that we should move to an enum, and I tried to do so, but I ran into issues discerning what should be variants vs. options e.g., is short its own rendering format (variant), or is it an option on graphics/no-graphics?

I think that (at least eventually) we likely want to fully enumerate all of the cases (so short would be its own thing). The only one that is orthogonal is color, IMO. To be clear, I don't mind not doing that in this PR!

estebank · 2026-11-09T20:37:25Z

+//! Check that compile errors are formatted in the "no-graphics" style
+//! when `--error-format=human-no-graphics` is used.
+
+//@ compile-flags: --error-format=human-no-graphics


Is there no gate for -Znightly-features for --error-format=human-no-graphics, or for that matter the previously existing --error-format=human-unicode? I thought we hadn't stabilized that last one yet (but I can see on stable rustc that it works).

The only reason I am concerned about it is that I might want to have a round of discussion on what the flag name should be long term. I am personally biased towards this new mode being called --error-format=text-only or --error-format=no-graphics.

Is there no gate for -Znightly-features for --error-format=human-no-graphics, or for that matter the previously existing --error-format=human-unicode?

-Zunstable-options isn't required in UI tests since RUSTC_BOOTSTRAP=1 is set for all UI tests. The docs I linked to say that act-as-stable can be used in UI tests to verify stable-only behavior; I can add a test that uses it if you want.

I thought we hadn't stabilized that last one yet (but I can see on stable rustc that it works).

Maybe I did something wrong, but using --error-format=human-unicode on +stable gives me an error, but not on nightly:

❯ echo 'fn main(){let x;}' | rustc +stable - --error-format=human-unicode error: `--error-format=human-unicode` is unstable

❯ echo 'fn main(){let x;}' | rustc +nightly - --error-format=human-unicode error[E0282]: type annotations needed ╭▸ <anon>:1:15 │ 1 │ fn main(){let x;} │ ━ ╰╴ help: consider giving `x` an explicit type ╭╴ 1 │ fn main(){let x: /* Type */;} ╰╴ ++++++++++++ error: aborting due to 1 previous error

The only reason I am concerned about it is that I might want to have a round of discussion on what the flag name should be long term. I am personally biased towards this new mode being called --error-format=text-only or --error-format=no-graphics.

I personally prefer --error-format=no-graphics and would be happy to switch to it if it seems like the right thing to do. I only went with --error-format=human-no-graphics to match the existing naming convention(s).

estebank · 2026-11-09T20:44:24Z

Can we add two more svg tests showing the interaction of color and no-color with the new diagnostic render?

View changes since the review

I can add an SVG test for color, but no-color always uses .stderr, as far as I can tell. The only way I could find to get no-color to use an SVG was to also enable -Zterminal-urls=yes.

I added a test that shows color (svg), no-color (stderr), and terminal-urls (SVG, with color). Let me know if they are what you were looking for

estebank · 2026-11-10T03:40:16Z

@bors r+

rust-bors · 2026-11-10T03:40:19Z

📌 Commit c34bdf9 has been approved by estebank

It is now in the queue for this repository.

@estebank

…tebank Add support for `annotate-snippets`'s `no-graphics` output format Tracking Issue: rust-lang#165164 MCP: rust-lang/compiler-team#1045 This PR adds the initial support for `annotate-snippets`'s [`no-graphics` output format](https://docs.rs/annotate-snippets/latest/annotate_snippets/struct.Renderer.html#method.no_graphics). The `no-graphics` output format doesn't show source snippets or use any graphical decorations and is primarily designed for Text-To-Speech and Braille displays. The goal at this time is to get `no-graphics` in front of users so we can iterate on and improve the output. --- 🤖 LLM involvement: I used an LLM to review the commits before submitting r? @estebank

@estebank

…tebank Add support for `annotate-snippets`'s `no-graphics` output format Tracking Issue: rust-lang#165164 MCP: rust-lang/compiler-team#1045 This PR adds the initial support for `annotate-snippets`'s [`no-graphics` output format](https://docs.rs/annotate-snippets/latest/annotate_snippets/struct.Renderer.html#method.no_graphics). The `no-graphics` output format doesn't show source snippets or use any graphical decorations and is primarily designed for Text-To-Speech and Braille displays. The goal at this time is to get `no-graphics` in front of users so we can iterate on and improve the output. --- 🤖 LLM involvement: I used an LLM to review the commits before submitting r? @estebank

JonathanBrouwer · 2026-11-10T10:25:58Z

💔 I suspect this PR failed tests as part of a rollup
@bors r-

After fixing the problem, consider running a try job for the failed job before re-approving.

Link to failure: #165742 (comment)

Probably this PR?
@bors try jobs=test-x86_64-gnu-aux

rust-bors · 2026-11-10T10:26:07Z

This pull request was unapproved.

This PR was contained in a rollup (#165742), which was unapproved.

View changes since this unapproval

Add support for `annotate-snippets`'s `no-graphics` output format try-job: test-x86_64-gnu-aux

rust-bors · 2026-11-10T11:27:02Z

💔 Test for 5220576 failed: CI. Failed job:

try - test-x86_64-gnu-aux (web logs, enhanced plaintext logs)

rustbot · 2026-11-12T01:36:25Z

Some changes occurred in src/tools/compiletest

cc @jieyouxu

Muscraft · 2026-11-12T01:37:20Z

The failures were caused by two things:

One of Cargo's tests depended on a rendered error message from Rust that was slightly modified by this PR
- cargo#17707 and Update cargo submodule #165820 addressed this failure
When I added the new color tests, I forgot to add the .windows.svg for them

Note: annotate-snippets@0.12.18 was released since this PR was originally opened, so I went ahead and updated to it since this PR was already updating to 0.12.17. 0.12.18 removed the Windows-specific colors, making the colors consistent across OSes. This made the Windows-specific color tests (.windows.svg) redundant, so I removed them. I would be happy to split the update into its own PR if desired.

@rustbot ready

estebank · 2026-11-12T06:21:01Z

@bors r+

rust-bors · 2026-11-12T06:21:05Z

📌 Commit 6a4426f has been approved by estebank

It is now in the queue for this repository.

rust-bors · 2026-11-12T11:24:22Z

☀️ Test successful - CI
Approved by: estebank
Duration: 3h 20m 37s
Pushing b4fe65c to main...

github-actions · 2026-11-12T11:27:51Z

What is this?

This is an experimental post-merge analysis report that shows differences in test outcomes between the merged PR and its parent PR.

Comparing 6b05f82 (parent) -> b4fe65c (this PR)

Test differences

Show 16 test diffs

Stage 1

[ui] tests/ui/diagnostic-flags/error-format-human-no-graphics.rs: [missing] -> pass (J1)
[ui] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#color: [missing] -> pass (J1)
[ui] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#no-color: [missing] -> pass (J1)
[ui] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#terminal-urls: [missing] -> pass (J1)
[ui (polonius)] tests/ui/diagnostic-flags/error-format-human-no-graphics.rs: [missing] -> pass (J2)
[ui (polonius)] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#color: [missing] -> pass (J2)
[ui (polonius)] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#no-color: [missing] -> pass (J2)
[ui (polonius)] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#terminal-urls: [missing] -> pass (J2)

Stage 2

[ui] tests/ui/diagnostic-flags/error-format-human-no-graphics.rs: [missing] -> pass (J0)
[ui] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#color: [missing] -> pass (J0)
[ui] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#no-color: [missing] -> pass (J0)
[ui] tests/ui/error-emitter/no-graphics.rs#terminal-urls: [missing] -> pass (J0)

Additionally, 4 doctest diffs were found. These are ignored, as they are noisy.

Job group index

Test dashboard

Run

cargo run --manifest-path src/ci/citool/Cargo.toml -- \
    test-dashboard b4fe65c19d1bb6e720c843086b785493c453028d --output-dir test-dashboard

And then open test-dashboard/index.html in your browser to see an overview of all executed tests.

Job duration changes

test-i686-gnu-nopt-2: 1h 23m -> 2h 36m (+88.3%)
test-x86_64-mingw-2: 1h 37m -> 2h 47m (+71.9%)
test-x86_64-msvc-2: 1h 34m -> 2h 39m (+67.7%)
test-x86_64-gnu-llvm-22: 37m 22s -> 1h (+60.9%)
dist-loongarch64-musl: 1h 18m -> 2h 4m (+57.6%)
dist-x86_64-freebsd: 1h -> 1h 33m (+54.7%)
dist-i686-mingw: 36m 45s -> 55m 7s (+50.0%)
dist-arm-linux-gnueabi: 1h 3m -> 1h 32m (+46.0%)
test-x86_64-gnu-aux: 3h 6m -> 1h 49m (-41.4%)
test-x86_64-msvc-ext1: 1h 43m -> 2h 24m (+40.1%)

How to interpret the job duration changes?

Job durations can vary a lot, based on the actual runner instance
that executed the job, system noise, invalidated caches, etc. The table above is provided
mostly for t-infra members, for simpler debugging of potential CI slow-downs.

rust-timer · 2026-11-12T12:22:18Z

Finished benchmarking commit (b4fe65c): comparison URL.

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

@rustbot label: -perf-regression

Instruction count

Our most reliable metric. Used to determine the overall result above. However, even this metric can be noisy.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.4%	[0.4%, 0.4%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-3.1%, -0.3%]	22
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-0.5%	[-1.7%, -0.2%]	27
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-3.1%, -0.3%]	22

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results (secondary -1.2%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	6.7%	[6.7%, 6.7%]	1
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-5.1%	[-6.5%, -3.8%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	-	-	0

Cycles

Results (primary -1.4%, secondary 9.7%)

A less reliable metric. May be of interest, but not used to determine the overall result above.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	2.1%	[2.1%, 2.1%]	1
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	9.7%	[3.5%, 23.1%]	12
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-3.2%	[-3.4%, -3.0%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.4%	[-3.4%, 2.1%]	3

Binary size

This perf run didn't have relevant results for this metric.

Bootstrap: 484.187s -> 482.212s (-0.41%)
Artifact size: 406.04 MiB -> 406.08 MiB (0.01%)

rustbot assigned estebank Nov 9, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Muscraft force-pushed the support-no-graphics branch from bd12853 to 791e562 Compare November 9, 2026 20:05

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

estebank approved these changes Nov 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

estebank reviewed Nov 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

Muscraft force-pushed the support-no-graphics branch from 791e562 to c34bdf9 Compare November 10, 2026 01:31

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors Bot added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Nov 10, 2026

jhpratt mentioned this pull request Nov 10, 2026

Rollup of 11 pull requests #165735

Closed

JonathanBrouwer mentioned this pull request Nov 10, 2026

Rollup of 14 pull requests #165742

Closed

rust-bors Bot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Nov 10, 2026

rust-bors Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2026

Auto merge of #165708 - Muscraft:support-no-graphics, r=<try>

5220576

Add support for `annotate-snippets`'s `no-graphics` output format try-job: test-x86_64-gnu-aux

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Muscraft force-pushed the support-no-graphics branch from 796f4d7 to 36e5310 Compare November 12, 2026 01:36

rustbot added A-compiletest Area: The compiletest test runner A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) labels Nov 12, 2026

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Nov 12, 2026

feat: Add support for annotate-snippets's no-graphics output format

6a4426f

Muscraft force-pushed the support-no-graphics branch from 36e5310 to 6a4426f Compare November 12, 2026 01:39

rust-bors Bot added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Nov 12, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rust-bors Bot added merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. and removed S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. labels Nov 12, 2026

rust-bors Bot merged commit b4fe65c into rust-lang:main Nov 12, 2026
15 checks passed

rustbot added this to the 1.102.0 milestone Nov 12, 2026

Muscraft deleted the support-no-graphics branch November 12, 2026 15:57

This was referenced Nov 13, 2026

Daily Grammar Check Failed - 2026-11-13 rust-lang/reference#2410

Open

Grammar check: update rustc for annotate-snippets no-graphics rust-lang/reference#2412

Open

Conversation

Muscraft commented Nov 9, 2026 • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rustbot commented Nov 9, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rustbot commented Nov 9, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

estebank left a comment • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

estebank Nov 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

estebank Nov 9, 2026 • edited by rustbot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

estebank commented Nov 10, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Nov 10, 2026

Uh oh!

JonathanBrouwer commented Nov 10, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Nov 10, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors Bot commented Nov 10, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rustbot commented Nov 12, 2026

Uh oh!

Muscraft commented Nov 12, 2026

Uh oh!

estebank commented Nov 12, 2026

Uh oh!

rust-bors Bot commented Nov 12, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

rust-bors Bot commented Nov 12, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Nov 12, 2026

Test differences

Stage 1

Stage 2

Job duration changes

Uh oh!

rust-timer commented Nov 12, 2026

Overall result: ✅ improvements - no action needed

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

6 participants

Muscraft commented Nov 9, 2026 •

edited by rustbot

Loading

estebank left a comment •

edited by rustbot

Loading

estebank Nov 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

estebank Nov 9, 2026 •

edited by rustbot

Loading