None empty #14607

sftse · 2025-12-04T13:53:53Z

Noticed a code pattern where None is used in place of an empty vector. The resulting code has to transform between different representations and liberally uses get_or_insert on the None. This is a bit roundabout, so use empty Vec as a replacement for None.

Empty Vecs don't allocate, so this changes nothing except make the code shorter.

Not entirely sure, but also think this fixes a bug where the code paths of None and Some(Vec::new()) would have diverged.

sftse · 2025-12-04T13:58:29Z

crates/tauri-cli/src/interface/rust.rs

        .clone()
        .unwrap_or_default();
      for bin in bins {
-        if let (Some(req_features), Some(opt_features)) =


This code previously had different behavior if options.features was Some(Vec::new()) (continue hit) vs None (continue not hit). This is odd given the variable names which imply the required features should be present.

sftse · 2025-12-04T13:59:59Z

crates/tauri-cli/src/mobile/android/mod.rs

+    features: if android_options.features.is_empty() {
+      None
+    } else {
+      Some(android_options.features.clone())
+    },


Did not check how this external type behaves, so this if branch might be overly conservative and replaceable with Some(android_options.features.clone())

I don't think it's being used at all currently, so wouldn't matter either ways

I'll check, just to make sure this is future-proof, even if it's not used.

Alternatively, if things are not used, should we remove them?

Alternatively, if things are not used, should we remove them?

I'm not the most familiar with it, maybe @lucasfernog knows about them a bit more

sftse · 2025-12-04T14:00:24Z

crates/tauri-cli/src/mobile/android/mod.rs

-    features: android_options.features,
+    features: if android_options.features.is_empty() {
+      None
+    } else {
+      Some(android_options.features)
+    },


Same here, if branch maybe removable.

sftse · 2025-12-04T14:02:04Z

crates/tauri-cli/src/mobile/mod.rs

+fn is_empty(v: &[String]) -> bool {
+  v.is_empty()
+}
+
 #[derive(Debug, Clone, Serialize, Deserialize)]
 pub struct CliOptions {
  pub dev: bool,
-  pub features: Option<Vec<String>>,
+  #[serde(default)]
+  #[serde(skip_serializing_if = "is_empty")]
+  pub features: Vec<String>,


This Serialize and Deserialize impl is the only publically visible way the change of internal fields might be observable. This uses serde configuration so serialization strings remain identical.

I think this is also different from before, it used to be something like "features": null in JSON

Since I'm not the most familiar with where is this used, I'll leave it to @FabianLars @lucasfernog

Think I checked this (not at workstation rn) and only used internally, will get back to you.

github-actions · 2025-12-04T15:02:11Z

Package Changes Through `e6623ea`

There are 4 changes which include tauri-macos-sign with patch, @tauri-apps/cli with patch, tauri-cli with patch, tauri-bundler with patch

Planned Package Versions

The following package releases are the planned based on the context of changes in this pull request.

package	current	next
tauri-macos-sign	2.3.1	2.3.2
tauri-bundler	2.7.4	2.7.5
@tauri-apps/cli	2.9.5	2.9.6
tauri-cli	2.9.5	2.9.6

Add another change file through the GitHub UI by following this link.

Read about change files or the docs at github.com/jbolda/covector

sftse · 2025-12-05T10:25:30Z

@FabianLars
Fixed CI

sftse · 2025-12-05T10:36:21Z

I'm a bit confused by how the change sets work, the bot suggested

---
"@tauri-apps/api": patch
"tauri-utils": patch
"tauri-macos-sign": patch
"tauri-bundler": patch
"tauri-runtime": patch
"tauri-runtime-wry": patch
"tauri-codegen": patch
"tauri-macros": patch
"tauri-plugin": patch
"tauri-build": patch
"tauri": patch
"@tauri-apps/cli": patch
"tauri-cli": patch
"tauri-driver": patch
---

even though only tauri-cli has any changes. Is this correct?

FabianLars · 2025-12-05T18:35:44Z

no the bot just lists all existing packages. just remove all that you didn't touch (eg in your case only tauri-cli needs to be there)

Legend-Master

Thanks

Legend-Master · 2025-12-06T06:12:22Z

crates/tauri-cli/src/mobile/android/mod.rs

+    features: if android_options.features.is_empty() {
+      None
+    } else {
+      Some(android_options.features.clone())
+    },


I don't think it's being used at all currently, so wouldn't matter either ways

Legend-Master · 2025-12-06T06:13:53Z

crates/tauri-cli/src/mobile/ios/mod.rs

          }
        }),
-    ios_features: ios_options.features.clone(),
+    ios_features: if ios_options.features.is_empty() {


Legend-Master · 2025-12-06T06:21:58Z

crates/tauri-cli/src/mobile/mod.rs

+fn is_empty(v: &[String]) -> bool {
+  v.is_empty()
+}
+
 #[derive(Debug, Clone, Serialize, Deserialize)]
 pub struct CliOptions {
  pub dev: bool,
-  pub features: Option<Vec<String>>,
+  #[serde(default)]
+  #[serde(skip_serializing_if = "is_empty")]
+  pub features: Vec<String>,


I think this is also different from before, it used to be something like "features": null in JSON

Since I'm not the most familiar with where is this used, I'll leave it to @FabianLars @lucasfernog

sftse requested a review from a team as a code owner December 4, 2025 13:53

github-project-automation bot added this to Roadmap Dec 4, 2025

github-project-automation bot moved this to 📬Proposal in Roadmap Dec 4, 2025

sftse commented Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

sftse force-pushed the none-empty branch from a718512 to bf7f090 Compare December 4, 2025 15:24

sftse mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2025

Respect required-features field from Cargo.toml #14379

Merged

sftse added 2 commits December 5, 2025 11:10

refactor: use empty vector for features instead of None

5f512e8

refactor: reorder

e108247

sftse force-pushed the none-empty branch from bf7f090 to e108247 Compare December 5, 2025 10:11

add change file

e6623ea

Legend-Master approved these changes Dec 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

Uh oh!

None empty #14607

Are you sure you want to change the base?

None empty #14607

Conversation

sftse commented Dec 4, 2025

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!

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!

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!

github-actions bot commented Dec 4, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Package Changes Through e6623ea

Uh oh!

sftse commented Dec 5, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sftse commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

FabianLars commented Dec 5, 2025

Uh oh!

Legend-Master left a comment

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!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

github-actions bot commented Dec 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Package Changes Through `e6623ea`

sftse commented Dec 5, 2025 •

edited

Loading