Macro fragment specifiers edition policy by traviscross · Pull Request #3531 · r...
source link: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/3531
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
Conversation
Contributor
Recently T-lang discussed the issue of macro matcher fragment specifiers, e.g. expr, falling out of sync with the underlying grammar of Rust. The consensus of the meeting was that it would be proper to set out a policy for how these divergences might be reconciled over edition boundaries.
The purpose of this RFC is to memorialize the resulting consensus.
added T-lang Relevant to the language subteam, which will review and decide on the RFC. I-lang-nominated Indicates that an issue has been nominated for prioritizing at the next lang team meeting. A-edition-2024 Area: The 2024 edition
labels
|
Does it make sense to add |
Contributor
Author
|
@deltragon: Thanks for bringing that up. That's now discussed in the RFC. |
Fast turnaround. Left a thought that can be added, but this looks good to me.
text/3531-macro-fragment-policy.md
Show resolved
Member
|
This great! Very sorry for it, but a minor bikeshed: should it be |
Contributor
Author
|
@Nilstrieb: You raise a good point. Reviewing RFC 430 and existing practice, |
Member
|
@traviscross Note: could you add a mention somewhere that there are cases where we can update a macro matcher within an edition, such as when we add brand new syntax that didn't previously lex (and thus couldn't be used in a macro)? |
removed the I-lang-nominated Indicates that an issue has been nominated for prioritizing at the next lang team meeting. label
Member
|
This looks great! This matches the policy we talked about, and gives a documented procedure for updating macro matchers in the future. @rfcbot merge |
|
Team member @joshtriplett has proposed to merge this. The next step is review by the rest of the tagged team members: No concerns currently listed. Once a majority of reviewers approve (and at most 2 approvals are outstanding), this will enter its final comment period. If you spot a major issue that hasn't been raised at any point in this process, please speak up! cc @rust-lang/lang-advisors: FCP proposed for lang, please feel free to register concerns. |
added proposed-final-comment-period Currently awaiting signoff of all team members in order to enter the final comment period. disposition-merge This RFC is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it.
labels
Contributor
|
@rfcbot reviewed |
added final-comment-period Will be merged/postponed/closed in ~10 calendar days unless new substational objections are raised.
and removed proposed-final-comment-period Currently awaiting signoff of all team members in order to enter the final comment period.
labels
|
🔔 This is now entering its final comment period, as per the review above. 🔔 |
added finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this RFC.
and removed final-comment-period Will be merged/postponed/closed in ~10 calendar days unless new substational objections are raised.
labels
|
The final comment period, with a disposition to merge, as per the review above, is now complete. As the automated representative of the governance process, I would like to thank the author for their work and everyone else who contributed. This will be merged soon. |
Contributor
Author
|
This RFC has been accepted and merged. This is a policy RFC, so there is no tracking issue. Thanks to all those who reviewed the RFC and provided useful feedback and suggestions. |
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
No one assigned
A-edition-2024 Area: The 2024 edition disposition-merge This RFC is in PFCP or FCP with a disposition to merge it. finished-final-comment-period The final comment period is finished for this RFC. T-lang Relevant to the language subteam, which will review and decide on the RFC. to-announce
Status: Done
No milestone
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
None yet
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK