Library evaluation tracking issue

[brson]

• Move docs to the crate level
• Add CI badges to Cargo.toml
• Add keywords and categories to Cargo.toml
• Add html_root_url attribute
• Remove mention of stable 'assignment_ops' feature from docs
• Add an example of implementing Default
• Add an example illustrating what the macro-generated API's look like
• Get rid of internal case from macro
• Make crate clippy-clean
• Automatically implement Hex, Octal, Binary
• Fix Debug representation of empty bitflags
• Use of semis instead of commas in bitflags dsl
• Change "flags" to "struct" in dsl
• Bump version to 1.0 (after all else).

This is the tracking issue for the evaluation performed by the libs team last week.

[brson]

cc @rust-lang-nursery/libs

[Cldfire]

Change "flags" to "struct" in dsl should be marked as completed: #84

[Amanieu]

Should we hold off on 1.0 until the crate is converted to use associated constants (#24)? The discussion in rust-lang/rust#29646 seems to be tending towards stabilizing them soon.

[sfackler]

I would love associated constants for bitflags, so I'd vote for yes if it looks like that'll be landing.

[brson]

That would make bitflags incompatible with quite recent rust's right? That seems kinda undesirable.

[sfackler]

It'd obviously require a major version bump on bitflags, but the ergonomic benefits of not having a bunch of random constants of different types thrown into the root module is pretty huge.

[robo9k]

Add CI badges to Cargo.toml should be marked as completed due to #100

[opilar]

All issues are completed. The library is ready to be evaluated.

[crumblingstatue]

Is it in any way problematic to release a bitflags 2.0 soon after it incorporates associated consts?

If so, I would prefer to wait for associated consts support before 1.0.

[crumblingstatue]

We might also want to consider #72, since pub(restricted) will land in next stable.

Then again, this could also be supported in bitflags 2.0.

[theduke]

Since associated constants are in FCP for stabilization, I'd rather wait a bit longer for a 1.0 rather than upgrading to 2.0 a few months later.

[brson]

Wow thanks @opilar @crumblingstatue @theduke !

[alexcrichton]

1.0 published!

[robinst]

Yay! @alexcrichton could you add release notes for 1.0.0 here?: https://github.com/rust-lang-nursery/bitflags/releases

(see #121)