-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.4k
Decide whether to separate cfg(version(".."))
and cfg_has_version
#141401
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Proposal: For the reasons outlined by @joshtriplett, I propose that we separate these questions and reopen the stabilization PR for @rfcbot poll |
Team member @traviscross has asked teams: T-lang, for consensus on: |
I'm going to check @scottmcm's box, since he signaled unambiguously in the meeting support for stabilizing |
FWIW, I do think there's potential value in making it easier to adopt In other words: please take my comments as concerns with the concrete proposal that was made, rather than any objection to the underlying value of wishing to better support the transition for people whose MSRVs are older than |
We discussed this in the lang call today. I was hoping that In tandem with the stabilization of @rfcbot reviewed |
@est31: That's your cue. Once you're ready, we'd welcome a new v2 stabilization PR for |
Thanks. I will file a stabilization PR in the coming days. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
In this stabilization,
#[cfg(version(...))]
#141137it was observed that stabilizing
cfg(version(".."))
doesn't help people immediately, because they have to wait for their MSRV to exceed the first version in whichcfg(version(".."))
is supported. To mitigate this, a new mechanism,cfg(has_cfg_version)
was proposed.Since then, @joshtriplett has raised good points about how this mechanism would be difficult to use. See this comment:
#[cfg(version(...))]
#141137 (comment)We need to decide whether we want to consider these questions together, or whether we'd accept a stabilization of
cfg(version(".."))
that sets this question aside.cc @rust-lang/lang @est31 @jieyouxu @ehuss
Tracking:
#[cfg(version(..))]
#64796cfg_version
cargo#15531The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: