Skip to content
This repository

Macro import/export #3114

Closed
eholk opened this Issue August 06, 2012 · 18 comments

8 participants

Eric Holk Alex Crichton Brian Anderson Graydon Hoare Felix S Klock II Isaac Aggrey Patrick Walton Steven Fackler
Eric Holk
Collaborator

We need a way to export macros from modules and import them in other modules.

Currently we either prepend a string of macro definitions to every file, such as with debug!, error!, etc., or we just copy and paste the macros we need. This second approach leads to code duplication and lots of subtly different implementations.

As a temporary workaround, we could probably use include!.

Eric Holk
Collaborator

This would provide a nice solution for #2247 as well.

Brian Anderson
Owner

Wishfully putting this on the 0.4 milestone.

Graydon Hoare
Owner

non-critical for 0.6, de-milestoning

Brian Anderson
Owner
brson commented April 15, 2013

Nominating this for a milestone.

Felix S Klock II
Collaborator

Does include! actually even function as a work-around for this problem? My brief experiments with using that did not seem to bear fruit.

Isaac Aggrey

@pnkfelix - I can't recall why, but I had to wrap the include! in a function -- see example use case in a bug I am working on #4219 (comment)

Felix S Klock II
Collaborator

@isaacaggrey but in that case the scope of the macro will be limited to that function, yes? (At least, that matches my intuition about the usual intentions for lexically-scoped macros.) So that seems like a problem.

Isaac Aggrey

@pnkfelix IIUC you would think so, but it seems to not limit the macro's scope to the function. If you are trying to import macros from a separate file (in my case, integer-templates.rs), then I can call the imported macros (in my case, int_template!) anywhere in the current file (even outside of the function).

I would link to a gist, but my Rust build is currently not working.

Felix S Klock II
Collaborator

Hmm, I see that this pattern certainly used to work in the code base, but we do not seem to use that pattern any more; @jbclements changed it in SHA: ca147a0

He replaced it with some #[macro_escape] attribute. See also commit SHA: 08b6057 which has a log message that explains the new scoping rules for macros (and also #5120 )

(Let me see if I can use that information to get include to work on macro definitions.)

Felix S Klock II
Collaborator

Or rather, the whole point is to avoid using include and instead use the modules themselves. Which is the original point of this ticket anyway. :)

Isaac Aggrey

Thanks for the update, @pnkfelix . I hadn't followed the last couple months of macro changes and didn't even realize that hack didn't work anymore!

I suppose I have the same question/issue as you then now. :)

Patrick Walton
Owner

I do not believe this is backwards incompatible.

Graydon Hoare
Owner

accepted for feature-complete milestone

Felix S Klock II
Collaborator

visiting for triage, email 2013-08-05.

I've looked at this in the past. Its something I'd like to see happen, especially coming from my experience working with Racket. (I'm not sure how many of the lessons/caveats from the Scheme community carry over here, though ... it depends in part on whether Rust has an analogue to let{,*,rec}-syntax or not.)

Alex Crichton
Collaborator

As pointed out in #10723, it may be possible to place #[macro_escape] at the top of a crate to let all the macros get serialized to the crate metadata. This would remove any need for importing/exporting macros, although it's not as general of a solution as having a use statement import a macro.

Felix S Klock II
Collaborator

Accepted for P-low.

Steven Fackler
Collaborator

This was done in #11151.

Alex Crichton
Collaborator

Hurray! nice work @sfackler!

Alex Crichton alexcrichton closed this January 24, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.