Yacin Tmimi

@ahl I still haven't had a chance to review this, but I saw the GitHub notification about the PR being updated. I wanted to mention that we strongly discourage merge...

Fair enough. To be completely honest it'll probably a while before I'm able to review this so you can hold off on rebasing until then, but I wanted to give...

From what I can tell I don't think we're actually running the `check-diff` test suite in our CI. We'll need to update [build_and_test.bat](https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/blob/master/ci/build_and_test.bat) and [build_and_test.sh](https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/blob/master/ci/build_and_test.sh) to cd into the `check_diff`...

@benluiwj thanks for the updates. It's good to see CI passing. This PR has gone through several rounds of review and there are a lot of intermedia commits that could...

Thanks for the report. Linking the tracking issue for `wrap_comments` #3347

@calebcartwright based on your comment https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/5577#issuecomment-2094503553 I know there was interest from t-style to not mess with how we format zero argument functions. Unfortunately the zero argument function changes described...

@ding-young thanks for picking this one up! I wonder if now would be a good time to refactor `visit_enum`, and introduce a `format_enum` function, which we can return a `RewriteResult`...

Can we also add this smaller reproducible case from the original issue: ```rust enum Node where P::: { Cons, } ```

@ding-young there were also some linked issues like https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/6137, https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/6318, https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/6378. Would be good to check these issues out as well. https://github.com/rust-lang/rustfmt/issues/6378 doesn't seem to have a minimal test case...

@ding-young thanks for looking into this refactor. I won't have time to review this PR this weekend, but I'll try to set aside some time for a review next week.